MY  LI  FE 

BY  THE  RX  HON. 

SIR  EDWARD.  CLARKE,K€. 


THE   STORY   OF   MY   LIFE 


HE  STORY  OF 


BY  THE  RIG 
SIR    EDWAS 

A. A.  OXFORD  ;  ASSCX;  . 
OF  Ki 

i860;      FOR     PLY 
JAN. -JUNE  1906;  H.M.'S  BOLI< 
OF  LINC« 


TON 
LARKE, 


WITH 


E.  P.  DUT 


ORK 

AND  COM> 
1919 


THE  STORY  OF  MY  LIFE 


BY  THE  RIGHT  HONOURABLE 
SIR    EDWARD   CLARKE,   K.C. 

A. A.  OXFORD  ;  ASSOC.  OF  CITY  OF  LONDON  COLLEGE  ;  HON.  FELLOW 
OF  KING'S  COLLEGE,  LONDON  J  M.P.  FOR  SOUTHWARK  FEB. -MARCH 
i860;  FOR  PLYMOUTH  18801900 ;  FOR  THE  CITY  OF  LONDON 
JAN. -JUNE  1906;  H.M.'S  SOLICITOR-GENERAL  1886-1892  ;  TREASURER 
OF  LINCOLN'S  INN  1906  ;  PRIVY  COUNCILLOR  1908. 


WITH  PORTRAIT 


NEW  YORK 

E.  P.  BUTTON  AND  COMPANY 
1919 


I  DEDICATE  THIS  BOOK 
TO   THE    BELOVED   MEMORY  OF   MY   DEAR 

FATHER   AND   MOTHER 

TO 

WHOSE    LOVING   CARE   AND   TEACHING   I   OWE 

UNDER    THE    PROVIDENCE    OF    GOD 

THE  HAPPINESS  AND  PROSPERITY 

OF    MY  LIFE 


E.   C. 


41526^ 


MOTTOES 

1861-1900 

AH  God,  for  a  man  with  heart,  head,  hand, 
Like  some  of  the  simple  great  ones  gone 
For  ever  and  ever  by ; 
One  still  strong  man  in  a  blatant  land, 
Whatever  they  call  him,  what  care  I, 
Aristocrat,  democrat,  autocrat — one 
Who  can  rule  and  dare  not  lie. 
And  ah  for  a  man  to  rise  in  me, 
That  the  man  I  am  may  cease  to  be. 

TBNNYSON,  Maud. 

1900- 

Not  all  who  seem  to  fail  have  failed  indeed, 
Not  all  who  fail  have  therefore  worked  in  vain, 
For  all  our  acts  to  many  issues  lead  ; 
And  out  of  earnest  purpose,  pure  and  plain. 
Enforced  by  honest  work  of  arm  or  brain, 
The  Lord  will  fashion  in  His  own  good  time 
(Be  this  the  labourer's  proudly  humble  creed) 
Such  ends  as  to  His  wisdom  fitliest  chime 
With  His  vast  love's  eternal  harmonies. 
There  is  no  failure  for  the  good  and  wise  : 
What  though  their  seed  should  fall  by  the  wayside, 
And  the  birds  snatch  it,  yet  the  birds  are  fed  ; 
Or  they  shall  bear  it  far  across  the  tide 
To  give  rich  harvests  after  thou  art  dead  ! 

TRENCH 


CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  PAOE 

I.      INTRODUCTORY I 

II.      CHILDHOOD  :     1841-1850         ....  8 

III.  SCHOOL:    1851-1854 16 

IV.  THE  SHOP  :    1855-1858         ....  25 

V.      LITERATURE,    POLITICS,   AND   LAW:     1850-1860  38 

VI.      THE   INDIA   HOUSE  :     1859-1860       ...  49 

VII.      THE   LAW   STUDENT  :     1861-1864    ...  57 

VIII.      SOME   LIGHTER   RECOLLECTIONS        ...  68 

IX.      EARLY  DAYS  AT  THE   BAR  :     1864-1866              .  76 

X.      EARLY   YEARS   OF  MARRIAGE  :     1866-1873          .  89 

XI.      POLITICAL  BEGINNINGS  I     1867-1874         .            .  95 

XII.      MASONIC  AND   DOMESTIC  :     1874-1877      .            .  IIO 

XIII.      THE   PENGE   MYSTERY:     1877             .             .             .  I2O 

XIV.      THE   DETECTIVE  CASE:     1877             .             .             .  136 

XV.     SOUTHWARK:  1877-1880       .         .         .  149 
XVI.    ELECTION  PETITIONS:  1880  .         .         ,         .171 

vii 


viii  CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  PAGE 

XVII.    PLYMOUTH:  1880 183 

XVIII.    CHIEFLY  DOMESTIC:  1880-1894        .         .  188 

XIX.      POLITICS    IN   THE    HOUSE  OF   COMMONS  AND 

ELSEWHERE:  1882-1884    .         .         .  204 

XX.    AN  UNEXPECTED  CHECK:  1885          .         .  235 

XXI.   THE  BARTLETT  CASE:  l886    .     .     .  246 

XXII.     SOLICITOR-GENERAL:  1886-1890    .         .  257 

XXIII.  QUIET     POLITICS    AND    A    NOTABLE     CASE  ! 

1891-1892           .....  294 

XXIV.  THE  FRONT  OPPOSITION   BENCH  I    1892-1895  302 

XXV.      VENEZUELA      AND      THE      JAMESON      RAID: 

1895-1896 319 

XXVI.     A  PRIVATE  MEMBER:    1896-1899      .         .  332 

XXVII.      THE  WAR  IN  SOUTH  AFRICA :    1899-1900      .  34! 

XXVIII.    OUT  OF  PARLIAMENT:  1900-1905     .         .  363 

XXIX.      THE   CITY   OF  LONDON  :    1906     .            .             .  374 

XXX.    A  MEDITATION:  1906      ....  391 

XXXI.      FROM  LABOUR  TO  REFRESHMENT  .*  1906-1914  396 

XXXII.      THE    END   OF  THE   STORY  :   1914           .             .  413 

LIST    OF    PLACES   OUTSIDE    LONDON  WHERE 

I   HAVE    MADE    POLITICAL   SPEECHES      .  421 

INDEX          .  .423 


THE    STORY    OF    MY    LIFE 


CHAPTER    I 

INTRODUCTORY 

No  ONE  will  doubt  that  vanity,  the  only  universal  weakness, 
has  something  to  do  with  my  desire  to  leave  a  record  of 
the  events  of  my  life.  I  do  not  doubt  it  myself.  But  I 
hope  and  believe  that  my  chief  reason  for  undertaking  the 
task  is  the  wish  that  such  a  book  may  interest  lads  whose 
early  lives  are  spent  as  mine  was,  in  somewhat  humble  and 
difficult  circumstances,  and  who  may  be  encouraged  by 
the  story  of  my  happy  and  successful  career  to  be  vigilant 
to  find,  and  active  to  use,  opportunities  of  self-improve- 
ment by  study,  by  exercise  of  mind  and  body,  by  the 
habitual  companionship  of  books,  by  the  cultivation  of 
worthy  friendships.  I  hope,  too,  it  will  encourage  them 
to  combat  the  besetting  selfishness  of  life  by  interesting 
themselves  in  the  public  affairs  of  their  country  and  the 
community  in  which  they  live,  and  in  the  movements  of 
spirit  and  intellect — social,  industrial,  moral,  and  religious 
—which  are  forming  the  character  and  so  determining  the 
future  of  our  race. 

Thus  they  may  rise  towards  that  complete  life  which 
is  alone  worthy  of  a  Christian  man,  a  life  of  faith  and  courage 
and  industry,  and  gain  for  themselves  habits  at  once  of 
energy  and  contentment.  As  I  write  I  am  humbled  by 
thinking  how  far  my  life  has  fallen  short  of  my  own  ideals. 
Still  I  have  not  been  consciously  untrue  to  them  ;  and 


£  c.:  ^,_i  \k  "         INTRODUCTORY  [CHAP.  1 

perhaps  tie  Vtory  of  my  life  may  help  others  to  a  fuller 
success. 

I  think  if  I  tell  it  myself  simply  and  briefly  it  will  be  more 
likely  to  do  good  than  if  I  leave  material  from  which,  when 
I  am  dead,  some  one  might  compile  a  larger  and  more 
elaborate  biography. 

I  know  very  little  of  my  family  history.  The  parish 
register  of  Axbridge  in  Somersetshire  would  probably  give 
some  information,  but  it  would  only  be  the  record  of  an 
undistinguished  family  of  yeomen  farmers,  one  of  whom, 
my  great-grandfather,  was  living  at  that  village  in  the 
later  years  of  the  eighteenth  century. 

Knowing  little  of  my  ancestors,  I  have  interested  myself 
the  more  in  the  men  who  have  borne  my  name  and  have 
been  in  any  way  distinguished  in  public  life.  There  are 
only  three  Edward  Clarkes  of  which  this  can  be  said  ;  and 
curiously  enough  each  of  these  was  connected  with  one  of 
the  three  great  interests  of  my  life — literature,  law,  and 
the  City  of  London.  One  of  them  was  a  politician  also, 
and  as  he  represented  a  Somersetshire  constituency,  I 
please  myself  by  thinking  that  I  may  be  one  of  his  de- 
scendants. 

In  1695  Edward  Clarke,  Member  of  Parliament  for 
Taunt  on,  was  the  chief  actor  in  an  event  which  Macaulay 
says  did  more  for  liberty  and  for  civilisation  than  the  Great 
Charter  or  the  Bill  of  Rights.1 

In  passing  a  Bill  for  the  continuance  of  certain  expiring 
Acts,  the  House  of  Commons  intentionally  omitted  the 
Act  which  for  fifty  years  had  controlled,  and  in  fact  de- 
stroyed, the  liberty  of  the  Press. 

The  Lords  inserted  the  Act,  and  the  Commons  on  the  Bill 
being  returned  to  them  with  this  amendment  struck  it  out. 
A  conference  of  the  two  Houses  took  place.  Edward 
Clarke  was  the  Manager  for  the  Commons,  and  drew  up  the 
reasons  for  their  insisting  on  the  omission. 

The  Lords  gave  way  and  our  Press  was  freed. 

The  second  notable  Edward  Clarke,  and  curiously  enough 

1  Macaulay's  History,  4,  542. 


A  NAMESAKE  3 

the  three  were  contemporaries,  comes  still  closer  to  my  own 
career,  for  he  was  a  Sir  Edward  Clarke  who  was  Treasurer 
of  Lincoln's  Inn. 

The  Black  books  of  the  Inn  have  helped  me  to  trace  the 
outline  of  his  life. 

He  was  called  to  the  Bar  in  November  1600,  and  after 
serving  the  office  of  Pensioner  (or  collector)  to  the  Society, 
in  which  capacity  I  regret  to  say  he  was  fined  £5  for  "  col- 
lecting soe  little  and  having  a  deficit  in  his  accounts,"  he 
was  called  to  the  bench  in  1626. 

He  was  then  Sir  Edward  Clarke,  and  had  some  years 
before  been  appointed  Recorder  of  Reading. 

So  far  from  being  remiss  in  money  matters  there,  he 
demanded  fees  which  the  burgesses  thought  so  extortionate 
that  they  appealed  to  the  Earl  of  Wallingford,  then  high 
steward  of  the  borough,  asking  him  to  fix  the  salary.  He 
fixed  it  at  £6  a  year,  and  this  was  agreed  to  by  the  corpora- 
tion. But  Sir  Edward  continued  to  exact  larger  fees  ;  and 
so  by  resolution  of  the  majority  of  the  principal  burgesses 
he  was  removed  from  office  and  a  Mr.  Saunders  elected  in 
his  place.  Then  long  controversy  went  on,  and  in  1625 
Sir  Edward  was  readmitted  to  office,  but  it  was  decided 
that  he  should  share  the  fees  equally  with  Mr.  Saunders. 

This  did  not  please  him  at  all ;  and  a  few  years  later  a 
new  charter  was  granted  to  Reading  and,  it  was  thought 
through  the  influence  of  Archbishop  Laud,  he  was  restored 
to  the  sole  enjoyment  of  the  Recorder  ship.  He  seems  to 
have  saved  money  at  Reading,  for  the  entry  in  the  Black 
book  of  Lincoln's  Inn  which  records  his  appointment  as 
a  bencher  goes  on  to  say  that  he  offered  to  lend  the  Inn 
£50,  "  which  kind  offer  the  members  of  the  bench  doe 
lovingly  accept."  Perhaps  when  he  made  this  offer  he 
thought  he  was  to  have  all  the  emoluments  of  the  Recorder- 
ship  instead  of  sharing  them  with  Mr.  Saunders ;  and 
oddly  enough  only  a  month  after  he  offered  to  lend  the 
£50  he  paid  the  Inn  £10  to  be  released  from  the  promise. 
He  was  Keeper  of  the  Black  book  in  1631,  and  the  records 
kept  by  himself  state  that  he  "  did  lend  money  to  the  Inn." 


4  INTRODUCTORY  [CHAP,  i 

The  wisdom  of  his  paying  the  forfeit  of  £10  was  shown  by 
an  entry  in  June  1632  that  "  Sir  Edward  Clarke  agreed 
to  accept  £100  in  satisfaction  of  the  bond  for  £150  due  to 
him  from  the  House."  In  1633-4  he  was  Treasurer  of  the 
Inn,  and  his  arms  are  in  one  of  the  south  windows  of  the 
Chapel.  He  had  a  prosperous  year,  for  the  receipts  were 
£641  us.  n^d.  and  the  payments  £483  us.  4^.,  leaving  a 
profit  to  the  Society  of  £158  os.  j%d. 

It  appears  that  he,  on  May  23rd,  1633,  called  his  son  to  the 
Bar  ;  a  very  exceptional  pleasure  which  I  as  Treasurer  also 
enjoyed  when  I  called  my  younger  son  on  November  igth, 
1906. 

The  third  of  my  namesakes  was  another  Sir  Edward 
Clarke  who  was  an  interesting  figure  in  the  roll  of  eminent 
citizens  who  have  filled  the  great  office  of  Lord  Mayor  of 
London. 

He  was  born  in  1627,  and  was  apprenticed  to  his  uncle, 
George  Clarke,  a  mercer  in  Cheapside. 

When  William  III  and  his  Queen  made  their  first  visit 
to  the  City  and,  with  the  Prince  of  Denmark,  were  enter- 
tained at  the  Guildhall  on  October  29th,  1689,  two  aldermen 
were  knighted,  and  one  of  them  was  Edward  Clarke,  then 
Alderman  of  Broad  Street  Ward,  who  was  elected  one  of 
the  Sheriffs  at  the  next  election  of  Lord  Mayor  and  Sheriffs, 
which  took  place  on  May  26th,  1690.  In  the  same  year  he 
was  Master  of  the  Merchant-Taylors'  Company,  of  which 
he  had  been  Warden  in  1687  and  1688. 

In  1691  he  was  one  of  the  Commissioners  appointed  by 
the  Common  Council  to  report  upon  the  office  of  Remem- 
brancer, who  reported  in  the  next  year.  Then  in  1697  he 
was  Lord  Mayor.  It  was  an  interesting  year  of  office,  for 
the  Corporation  gave  a  great  reception  to  William  III 
when  he  returned  to  England  after  the  Peace  of  Ryswick, 
and  the  Lord  Mayor  and  Sheriffs  attended  the  thanks- 
giving service  held  in  the  yet  unfinished  new  Cathedral  of 
St.  Paul's. 

He  died  in  1703,  and  was  buried  in  the  Church  of  St. 
Matthew,  Friday  Street,  to  which  he  and  Thomas  Sandford 


1800-36]  MY   FATHER  5 

(probably  a  brother  churchwarden)  had  given  the  front  of 
the  gallery  and  the  King's  arms,  and  where  a  tablet  in 
the  south  aisle  recalls  his  memory. 

My  great-grandfather  mentioned  above  was  not,  I  believe, 
a  very  clever  or  very  successful  man.  A  son  or  nephew  of 
his  went  to  Australia,  and  by  and  by  became  a  millionaire 
and  the  first  Australian  baronet. 

As  the  family  fortunes  declined  one  son  drifted  to  Bath, 
and  was  there  employed  at  the  York  House  Hotel. 

He  was  fortunate  in  obtaining  for  his  only  son,  my  father, 
who  was  born  at  Axbridge  in  1800,  a  start  in  life  as 
apprentice  to  the  Paynes,  a  long-established  finrr  of  silver- 
smiths, who  carried  on  business  at  the  south-east  corner  of 
Union  Street  and  Quiet  Street,  Bath. 

Here,  from  1813  to  1820,  my  father  was  employed ;  and 
he  always  spoke  gratefully  of  the  way  in  which  he  was 
treated,  and  the  friendly  interest  which  the  members  of  the 
firm  took  in  his  subsequent  fortunes.  He  happened  to  be 
at  Axbridge  in  1815  when  the  coach  came  in  covered  with 
laurel,  and  bringing  the  news  of  the  victory  of  Waterloo. 
At  this  time  Bath  was  the  most  fashionable  of  English 
towns,  and  he  remembered  seeing  Lord  Liverpool  and 
Canning  and  Wilberforce  talking  together  at  the  door  of 
the  shop  in  which  he  served,  and  at  which  Liverpool  and 
Canning  were  occasionally  customers.  When  his  appren- 
ticeship was  ended,  he  came  to  London,  and  was  an  assistant 
at  a  shop  in  Oxford  Street,  and  one  at  Wilderness  Row, 
Clerkenwell,  before  he  found  employment  in  which  he 
stayed  for  some  years  in  the  service  of  Mr.  Croswell,  who 
kept  a  small  jeweller's  shop  in  St.  Paul's  Churchyard,  just 
opposite  the  north  door  of  the  Cathedral.  The  manage- 
ment of  the  business  was  left  to  my  father  ;  he  had  a  good 
salary  judged  by  his  modest  needs ;  for  some  time  he  had 
been  engaged  to  a  very  pretty  girl  at  Bath,  so  in  1836  he 
went  down  to  that  city,  put  on  the  blue-tailed  coat  with 
large  brass  buttons  which  was  then  the  regulation  wedding 
garb ;  went  to  Bathwick  Church  by  back  streets  because 
he  looked  so  conspicuous,  and  was  married  to  Frances 
2 


6  INTRODUCTORY  [CHAP.  1 

George.  He  was  fortunate  indeed  in  finding  such  a  wife. 
My  mother  was  then  twenty-six  years  of  age,  ten  years 
his  junior.  She  was  slight  and  graceful  in  figure  ;  her  face 
was  of  delicate  and  pensive  beauty  with  fine  dark  eyes ; 
her  manners  were  quiet  and  reserved  ;  not  highly  educated, 
knowing  no  language  but  her  own,  with  music  for  her  only 
accomplishment,  she  had  read  much  of  the  graver  kinds  of 
English  literature,  and  her  exceptional  strength  of  char- 
acter, blemished  as  it  was  by  a  gloomy  Calvinistic  theology, 
was  the  fitting  supplement  and  corrective  to  my  father's 
gay  and  somewhat  careless  disposition.  Her  father  had 
been  in  business  at  Bath,  and  after  his  death  his  widow, 
with  the  help  of  this  daughter,  managed  the  depot  of  the 
Society  for  the  Promotion  of  Christian  Knowledge  at 
Milsom  Street,  Bath,  and  it  was  from  that  occupation  in 
one  of  the  most  beautiful  towns  in  Europe  that  the  young 
bride  came  to  the  modest  lodgings  in  Northampton  Street, 
Clerkenwell.  She  burst  into  tears  when  she  saw  the  ugliness 
of  the  great  wilderness  of  bricks  and  mortar  which  was  to 
be  her  future  home.  But,  the  first  tears  shed,  there  began 
a  life  which  for  many  years  was  one  of  almost  unclouded 
happiness. 

In  July  1837  a  girl  was  born ;  and  christened  in  the 
mother's  name.  In  May  1839  the  arrival  of  another  girl, 
called  Margaretta,  after  my  mother's  only  sister,  was  some 
disappointment,  but  in  that  year  there  was  much  to  think 
of  in  the  excitement  of  the  daring  step  being  made  of  setting 
up  a  business  in  the  new  King  William  Street  which  had 
but  lately  been  completed. 

It  was  a  bold  venture.  The  rent  of  the  house,  where, 
according  to  the  wise  habit  of  those  days,  the  family  would 
live  over  the  shop,  was  £90  a  year,  and  severe  economy  had 
only  enabled  my  father  to  save  £200,  which  was  his  entire 
capital.  To  start  a  jeweller's  and  silversmith's  business  on 
such  a  capital  seemed  madness.  But  all  who  knew  my  dear 
father  loved  and  trusted  him.  The  wholesale  dealers  in 
every  branch  of  the  trade  helped  the  man  whose  character 
of  instinctive  honesty  they  had  learned  to  trust  and  there 


1841]  MY    BIRTH  7 

was  one  firm,  that  of  Eady  &  Paris  of  Red  Lion  Street, 
Clerkenwell,  of  whose  unfailing  and  most  generous  kindness 
during  a  struggle  which  lasted  forty  years,  I  cannot  think 
without  emotion  and  the  deepest  gratitude.1 

The  experiment  was  from  the  first  a  fair  success. 

The  happiness  of  the  home  life  was  increased  by  the 
more  constant  companionship  now  rendered  possible,  and 
its  measure  was  filled  when  on  February  I5th,  1841,  the 
first  son  was  born. 

1  The  first  Company  dinner  I  attended  during  my  short  Membership  for 
the  City  of  London  was  at  the  Goldsmiths'  Hall,  and  the  Prime  Warden 
was  Mr.  Frank  Eady,  the  son  of  one  of  my  father's  old  friends,  and  at  that 
time  (1906)  the  head  of  the  old  firm. 


CHAPTER    II 

CHILDHOOD  :     1841-1850 

OF  the  history  of  my  first  ten  years  there  is  little  to  tell. 
In  truth  the  incidents  of  childhood  are  of  little  importance  ; 
what  really  matters  is  the  character  of  the  home,  the 
atmosphere  in  which  the  young  life  learns  to  think.  And 
before  I  mention  one  or  two  incidents  which  remain  in  my 
memory  and  happened  before  I  was  ten  years  old,  I  will 
try  to  sketch  the  home  in  which  it  was  my  good  fortune 
to  be  brought  up.  It  was  a  home  of  small  space  and  of 
narrow  means. 

My  dear  father  was  of  a  simple,  kindly,  and  most  generous 
nature,  which  shone  through  clear  blue  eyes  and  in  a  sunny 
smile.  H e  had  little  education.  I  do  not  remember  his  ever 
reading  a  book ;  his  reading  was  confined  to  The  Morning 
Herald,  which  was  diligently  studied  in  the  frequent  intervals 
of  leisure  which  the  character  and  small  extent  of  his 
business  gave  him. 

But  his  nature  was  not  without  refinement.  He  had  a 
sweet  tenor  voice,  played  well  on  the  flute,  and  was  fond 
of  music  and  the  dramatic  art.  And  he  had  some  un- 
trained skill  in  ivory  carving.  Where  or  when  this  was 
acquired  I  do  not  know ;  he  never  in  my  recollection  did 
any  such  work,  but  an  excellent  little  figure  of  Napoleon 
and  one  of  a  sleeping  child,  both  carved  by  him,  were 
among  the  most  precious  of  my  mother's  few  treasures. 

His  only  pleasures  outside  his  home  were  the  occasional 
meetings  of  the  Candlewick  Ward  Club  at  the  White  Hart 
in  Cannon  Street,  and  the  rarer  dinners  of  the  Cooks'  Com- 

8 


1841-50]  THE   SHOP  9 

pany,  to  his  membership  of  which  ancient  guild  he  owed 
the  fact  that  he  never  in  his  life  served  on  a  jury.1 

A  very  rare  visit  to  the  theatre  when  he  took  me  to  see 
one  of  Shakespeare's  plays  was  an  indulgence  of  which  my 
mother's  severe  opinions  did  not  allow  her  to  approve.     I 
was  the  only  one  of  the  children  permitted  to  share  this 
dangerous  pleasure.     My  father  had  not  some  of  the  qualities, 
whether  of  merit  or  defect,  which  help  to  success  in  business. 
He  had  abundant  industry,  but  little  energy.    The  in- 
grained conservatism  of  his  nature  made  him  continue  for 
forty  years  exactly  the  same  methods  of  trade  as  he  began 
with  when  he  went  to  King  William  Street  in  1837.     No 
change  was  ever  made.    The  same  formal  row  of  candle- 
sticks and  dish  covers  filled  the  top  of  the  shop  window. 
The  same  little  cards  with  sets  of  studs  upon  them  and  the 
unchangeable  price  neatly  written  under  each  set,  the  same 
trays  of  rings,  the  same  rows  of  hanging  chains,  were  seen 
in  the  same  places  year  after  year.     In  the  glass  case  on 
the  counter  the  same  pencil  cases  and  smelling  bottles  and 
plated  spoons  and  forks  waited  year  after  year  for  the 
expected  purchaser.      So   it   is   not   wonderful   that   the 
business  did  not  grow.     Old  friends  were  very  faithful; 
attracted  and  retained  by  his  cheerful  gratitude  to  any  one 
who  came  to  buy,  and  by  his  manifest  and  absolute  honesty. 
He  was  indeed  a  gentleman  by  nature.     Incapable  of  a 
mean  action  or  an  ungenerous  thought ;    his  heart  always 
youthful  in  its  frank  delight  at  any  piece  of  good  fortune 
which  came  to  him  or  to  another  ;  his  life  ruled  by  a  devout 
religious  feeling  which  knew  little  of  creeds  and  dogmas, 
yet  gave  him  hope  and  courage  and  strength,  and  was  to 
him  indeed  a  habit  of  goodness. 

I  thank  God  for  this,  one  of  the  greatest  of  the  blessings 
that  He  has  showered  upon  me,  that  He  set  before  my 
childhood  a  pattern  of  life  so  lovable,  so  noble,  and  so  pure. 

In  my  dear  mother  he  had  a  companion  of  a  different 

1  In  June  1906  the  Cooks'  Company  did  me  the  honour,  never  paid  to 
any  one  else,  of  presenting  me  \yjth  the  honorary  freedom  and  livery  of 
the  Company, 


io  CHILDHOOD  [CHAP,  n 

and,  on  the  intellectual  side,  a  higher  type.  At  the  depot 
at  Bath  she  had  opportunities  of  improving  her  education 
which  she  did  not  neglect.  She  had  read  much  and  acquired 
a  habit  of  reading — chiefly  history  and  the  theology  of  the 
seventeenth  century.  She  had  little  training  in  music, 
but  she  sang  sweetly,  and  played  the  piano  with  ease  and 
taste.  She  was  a  devoted  wife  and  mother.  To  her  home 
and  the  teaching  of  her  children  all  the  thoughts  and  activi- 
ties of  her  life  were  given.  Her  acquaintances  were  very 
few,  and  as  we  grew  older  they  fell  off  through  neglect. 
She  was  not  indeed  of  a  character  which  invited  the 
lighter  friendships.  With  strangers  she  was  cold  and 
reserved  in  manner.  Absolutely  devoted  as  she  was  to 
her  husband  and  children,  it  seemed  as  time  went  on  that 
it  was  the  devotion  of  duty  rather  than  of  love.  In  her 
a  sweet  nature  had  been,  by  the  incidents  or  influences  of 
her  early  life,  rendered  somewhat  hard  and  unsympathetic. 

What  those  incidents  were  I  never  knew.  There  was 
always  a  strange  reticence  on  the  part  of  both  my  parents 
about  that  early  life.  Her  father  was  never  mentioned ; 
her  mother  very  rarely.  Indeed  the  statements  that  I 
heard  that  her  father's  name  was  Henry  George,  that  he 
was  a  hairdresser  in  Bath,  and  that  he  there  committed 
suicide,  always  seemed  something  of  a  myth.  There  was  an 
old  woman  named  Betsy,  who  used  to  come  to  the  shop 
once  a  month,  and  there  receive  from  my  father  in  almost 
absolute  silence  on  both  sides  a  certain  small  sum  of  money, 
of  whom  we  children  used  to  speak  to  each  other  mysteri- 
ously as  being  connected  with  some  secrets  of  the  past. 
Whatever  the  cause  the  severity  of  character  was  fixed. 
Especially  in  its  religious  aspects.  My  mother  was  a  rigid 
Calvinist  in  her  creed,  inexorable  in  her  judgement,  espe- 
cially in  cases  of  immorality  ;  fond  of  the  severities  of  the 
Old  Testament,  strict  in  the  precise  observance  of  the 
Sabbath,  and  in  abstinence  from  theatres  and  public  dances, 
and  from  the  lighter  forms  of  literature. 

The  government  of  the  little  household,  its  admirable 
economies,  and  the  intellectual  side  of  our  training,  came 


1841-50]  THE    HOME  ii 

from  her,  but  my  father's  sunny  spirit  gave  life  and  cheer- 
fulness to  a  home  which  otherwise  would  have  been  gloomy. 
I  said  it  was  a  home  of  small  space  and  of  narrow  means. 
From  first  to  last  my  father's  income  only  averaged  and 
rarely  exceeded  £300  a  year  after  paying  rent  and  taxes. 
Upon  this  income  my  mother  and  he  brought  up  a  family 
of  six  children,  who  all  had  a  good  education,  and  a  home 
of  comfort  and  of  some  refinement.  The  house  itself  was 
cruelly  small.  Besides  the  shop  there  were  only  four  rooms, 
a  sitting-room,  two  bedrooms,  and  a  kitchen,  and  it  taxed 
my  mother's  skill  in  management  to  make  life  in  such  a 
home  consistent  with  decency  and  health.  In  the  top  room 
where  the  parents  slept  a  little  cot  held  the  latest  born  of 
the  children.  Outside  on  the  landing  a  bed  was  placed 
for  one  of  the  boys.  The  girls  and  the  maid- servant  slept 
in  the  other  bedroom  which  was  on  the  second  floor.  The 
cook  slept  in  the  kitchen.  The  shop-boy  slept  in  the  shop 
on  a  truckle-bed  before  the  counter,  and  when  in  1848  the 
arrival  of  a  third  boy  ousted  me  from  the  staircase  bed,  I 
also  had  a  folding  bed  behind  the  counter  in  the  shop. 
That  was  my  sleeping  place  from  the  time  I  was  seven 
until  we  left  the  house  ten  years  later. 

The  home  was  crowded,  but  it  was  not  without  refine- 
ment. All  the  family  life  belonged  to  the  sitting-room  on 
the  first  floor,  which  was  dining-room,  drawing-room, 
library,  school-room,  and  play-room  all  in  one.  Let  me 
try  to  describe  it.  A  room  about  sixteen  feet  by  twelve, 
narrowed  at  one  end  by  the  slant  of  the  fireplace  at  its 
corner.  Two  large  windows  to  the  street,  with  low  blinds 
of  a  sort  of  brown  gauze.  At  one  end,  where  the  door 
opened  from  the  staircase,  a  large  piano  with  a  flat  top, 
upon  it  standing  the  oil  lamp,  by  which  at  night  the  room 
is  lighted,  and  some  piles  of  music  and  of  books. 

At  the  other  end  a  black  horsehair  sofa  filling  the  space 
between  the  window  and  the  fireplace.  On  the  wall  above 
the  sofa  an  engraving  of  the  Queep  being  entertained  at 
the  Guildhall  in  1840,  where  my  father  had  contrived  to  be 
present  in  the  garb,  if  not  with  the  occupation,  of  a  waiter. 


12  CHILDHOOD  [CHAP,  n 

Above  the  mantel-shelf  a  miniature  of  my  mother  at  the 
age  of  twenty,  with  hair  piled  up  in  curls,  and  a  low  bodice, 
and  short  puffed  sleeves.  On  the  mantel-shelf  a  gilt  clock, 
a  vase  or  two,  and  the  ivory  statuettes  under  glass  shades. 
In  the  centre  a  square  school  table  with  flaps  which 
adapted  it  to  its  various  purposes.  Round  the  room, 
placed  regularly  against  the  wall,  half-a-dozen  horsehair 
chairs  with  stiff  mahogany  frames  and  a  child's  chair  or 
two.  This  was  all  that  could  be  seen,  and  it  was  bare 
enough.  But  between  the  door  and  the  fireplace  was  the 
real  treasure-house,  a  spacious  three-cornered  cupboard 
with  shelves  round  it.  Here  were  books,  slates,  and  play- 
things, a  large  Noah's  Ark,  some  historical  and  geographical 
puzzle  maps,  games  of  English  Kings  and  Queens  and  the 
cities  of  the  world,  and  a  box  of  Loto,  which  taught  us 
quickness  of  eye  and  was  the  nearest  approach  to  a  game 
of  chance  we  were  ever  allowed  to  play.  In  this  room, 
when  prayers  had  been  read  and  breakfast  was  finished, 
we  set  to  our  lessons  for  the  day.  As  I  try  to  recall  the 
past  I  seem  to  see  a  little  fair-haired  girl  of  twelve — my 
sister  Fanny — at  the  piano,  with  her  mother — the  never- 
ending  needlework  in  her  hands — sitting  by  to  correct  and 
encourage.  At  the  table,  drawing,  is  a  girl  with  dark  eyes 
and  hair,  two  years  younger,  my  sister  Madgie,  a  cripple, 
dragging  herself  about  heavily  with  steel  frames  from  foot 
to  knee,  always  an  invalid,  but  always  happy  in  the  art 
which  was  the  chief  resource  and  pleasure  of  her  life.1  And 
at  the  sofa  on  his  knees  is  a  small  pale-faced  boy,  deep  in 
some  book,  almost  certainly  a  book  of  history.  It  was  a 
happy  childhood.  When  the  lessons  were  over  we  went 
for  a  walk  in  Drapers'  Gardens  or  the  garden  of  Finsbury 
Circus ;  or  sometimes  went  to  the  Temple  Gardens  along 
the  narrow  streets  which  filled  the  space  now  opened  by 
Cannon  Street  and  Queen  Victoria  Street,  or  went,  again 
through  narrow  streets,  to  the  Tower  of  London,  where  we 
played  in  the  Moat  Garden  and  rejoiced  in  childish  dreams 

1  She   designed,  as  a  pupil  at  the  Female  School  of  Art   in  Queen's 
Square,  the  lace  which  Princess  Louise  wore  at  her  wedding. 


1841-50]  OUR    PLEASURES  13 

of  the  history  of  the  Tower.  If  the  afternoon  was  wet, 
there  was  the  unfailing  resource  of  looking  through  the 
window  at  the  changing  tide  of  traffic,  or,  as  customers 
were  likely  to  be  few  and  the  shop  bell  could  soon  be 
answered,  the  dear  father  would  come  up  and  play  the  flute 
to  us,  or  join  our  games,  or  sing  with  our  mother  the  duet 
we  were  fond  of,  "  Rise,  fair  maiden,  chase  thy  slumbers," 
or  take  one  or  two  of  us  on  his  knees  while  she  sang  "  Phyllis 
is  my  only  joy." 

There  were  other  and  rarer  pleasures.  Once  a  year  a 
long  day  at  the  Zoological  Gardens.  And  once  or  twice 
an  old  customer,  Captain  Greet,  who  commanded  H.M.S. 
Crocodile,  the  guardship  moored  off  the  Tower,  asked  us  to 
come  and  have  tea  on  board,  and  the  wonders  of  the  ship 
itself,  and  the  stories  he  would  tell  us  of  sea  life,  and  the 
sight  of  the  Traitor's  Gate  and  the  central  Keep  of  the 
Tower,  made  the  visit  a  precious  memory  for  many  months. 

Now  and  then  we  went  to  a  neighbour's  house  where  we 
and  his  children  used  to  learn  and  practise  dancing,  and 
once  a  year  we  had  a  children's  party  with  a  Christmas  tree. 

Each  spring  a  lodging  was  taken  at  Greenwich,  and  here 
for  a  few  weeks  we  took  it  in  turn  to  stay  with  our  mother, 
and  in  the  glorious  heath,  the  beauties  of  Greenwich  Park, 
the  wonders  of  the  great  clock  and  ball  of  the  Observatory, 
and  the  pictures  and  relics  in  the  painted  Hall  of  Greenwich 
Hospital,  found  enjoyments  ever  exciting  and  ever  fresh. 
Now  and  then  my  father  would  come  down  by  train,  in  one 
of  the  open  trucks,  without  a  cover  and  without  a  seat, 
which  then  were  used  for  the  cheapest  class. 

Again  I  thank  God  for  such  a  happy  childhood  so  guarded 
and  so  trained.  Had  my  parents  been  people  of  wealth 
and  rank  they  could  not  have  given  me  a  better  start  in 
life  ;  they  could  not  if  they  would  have  given  me  the  same 
fullness  of  parental  care. 

Of  my  home  life  before  I  was  ten  years  old  there  are 
only  two  incidents  which  I  clearly  recollect.  One  was  the 
Chartist  riot  of  1848.  The  night  before  the  expected  out- 
break my  father  took  me  out  to  see  the  sandbags  piled  along 


14  CHILDHOOD  [CHAP,  n 

the  parapet  of  the  Bank  of  England  through  which  the 
soldiers  would  fire  on  the  rioters.  On  April  loth  itself  we 
were  all  in  anxiety  and  excitement.  The  shops  were  shut. 
My  father,  armed  with  his  special  constable's  staff,  went  to 
his  post  of  duty  on  London  Bridge.  All  the  morning  we 
children  were  at  the  window,  peeping  over  the  brown  blinds 
and  wondering  when  the  fighting  would  begin.  Just  about 
12  o'clock  there  was  a  thrill.  A  large  wagon  with  about  a 
dozen  men  in  it,  and  at  its  centre  a  tall  pole  with  the  red 
cap  of  liberty  on  its  top,  was  driven  rapidly  by,  and  we 
thought  the  terrible  moment  had  come.  But  nothing 
happened.  By  and  by  the  special  constables  came  back 
laughing  and  joking,  and  we  heard  that  the  rebellion  had 
fizzled  out  before  it  reached  Westminster  Bridge. 

The  other  incident  was  of  a  very  different  kind.  The 
bed  behind  the  counter  was  a  necessity,  but  it  was  a  hard 
trial  to  a  young  child.  The  noises  of  the  street  frightened 
me,  and  when  they  died  away  the  terrors  of  the  silences 
took  their  place.  I  would  lie  awake  listening  for  the  police- 
man's tread  which  brought  a  suggestion  of  protection. 
Sometimes  a  drunken  man  would  reel  against  the  shutters, 
and  wake  me  with  the  rattle  of  the  thin  sheets  of  iron  which 
were  put  between  them  and  the  shop  windows.  Some- 
times the  noise  of  quarrel  or  a  woman's  scream  would  startle 
me  from  sleep,  and  leave  me  in  restless  and  excited  wakeful- 
ness.  Sometimes,  and  this  was  the  worst,  I  fancied  that  I 
heard  a  key  in  the  door,  or  a  chisel  at  the  shutters,  or  the 
sound  of  some  one  stealthily  moving  in  the  shop.  Then  fear 
became  a  physical  pain.  One  night  it  was  unbearable.  I 
sprang  up  and  violently  rang  the  bell.  Next  moment  I  was 
ashamed  and  frightened  at  what  I  had  done.  My  father 
was  quick  of  temper,  my  mother  severe  in  punishments ;  I 
had  disturbed  and  frightened  them  without  a  cause.  Foot- 
steps hurrying  on  the  stairs,  my  father  and  mother  quickly 
by  me,  candle  in  hand.  I  pretend  to  be  asleep.  "  What 
is  the  matter  ?  Why  did  you  ring  ?  "  Then  the  futile  false- 
hood, "  I  did  not  ring."  They  looked  at  each  other ;  I 
think  they  understood.  There  was  no  scolding ;  a  few 


1841-50]  A    PAINFUL   RECOLLECTION  15 

soothing  words  and  they  went  away,  leaving  me  to  sob 
myself  to  sleep  in  the  sorrow  and  humiliation  of  having 
told  a  cowardly  lie.  I  do  not  know  what  happened  after- 
wards, but  I  think  I  can  guess.  For  a  day  or  two  my  father 
would  be  kinder  than  ever.  For  many  weeks  my  mother 
would  look  at  me  sadly ;  she  would  make  me  learn  a  text 
which  told  of  the  doom  of  liars,  and  she  would  offer  heart- 
broken prayers  that  her  erring  child  might  be  saved  from 
the  wrath  to  come.  I  never  rang  the  bell  again. 


CHAPTER    III 
SCHOOL  :    1851-1854 

WHEN  I  was  nearly  ten  years  old  the  question  where  I  was 
to  go  to  school  had  to  be  faced.  My  father  had  hoped  for  a 
nomination  to  Christ's  Hospital,  but  in  this  he  was  disap- 
pointed, and  it  was  decided  that  I  should  go  to  the  Merchant- 
Taylors'  School  in  Suffolk  Lane,  Cannon  Street.  My  name 
was  duly  entered  and  school  books  were  bought.  Two  old 
ladies  named  Townsend  kept  a  sort  of  boarding  house 
opposite  the  door  of  the  school,  and  there  it  was  arranged 
that  I  should  dine  and  prepare  my  lessons  in  the  evening. 
It  was  within  a  week  of  the  assembly  of  the  school  when  I 
had  a  recurrence  of  the  severe  and  continuous  headache 
by  which  I  had  for  several  years  been  troubled.  Dr.  Lloyd 
came  over  from  Finsbury  Circus,  and  on  his  advice  the  idea 
of  a  day  school  was  given  up,  and  my  father  looked  about 
for  a  school  in  the  country  where  I  might  have  less  teaching 
and  more  exercise  and  fresh  air.  He  saw  in  his  daily 
paper  an  advertisement  of  a  school  at  Edmonton,  where 
sound  tuition,  domestic  care,  good  diet,  and  spacious  play- 
grounds were  offered  for  the  modest  sum  of  £30  a  year. 
So  one  morning  in  January  1851  my  mother  took  me  in 
the  omnibus  which  started  from  the  "  Flower  Pot "  in 
Bishopsgate  Street,  and  was  the  only  regular  conveyance 
between  London  and  the  pleasant  country  village  which 
John  Gilpin's  ride  made  famous. 

It  was  for  me  a  most  fortunate  choice. 

In  an  old  rambling  house  next  to  the  Bell  Inn,  the 
schoolmaster,  with  the  aid  of  three  or  four  ushers  and  an 
invaluable  matron,  taught  and  took  care  of  about  a  hundred 


1851-4]  SCHOOL   AT   EDMONTON  17 

boys.    He  was  himself  a  man  of  no  great  education,  with 
a  pompous  manner  and  full  rotund  voice ;    a  terrible  im- 
postor so  far  as  school  work  was  concerned,  but  a  shrewd 
and  clever  manager  of  boys  and  their  parents.    His  black- 
tailed   coat,    his   voluminous   white    neckcloth   and   that 
unctuous  voice,  were  part  of  his  stock-in-trade,  and  the 
grave  deference  of  his  "  my  dear  madam,"  the  tenderness 
of  his  "  your  dear  little  boy,"  won  many  a  mother's  heart. 
In  truth  he  was  a  selfish,  hard  man,  capable,  as  I  found 
out  later,  of  spite  and  cruel  injustice.    The  first  master 
was  one  Oakshott,  a  much  better  type,  rough  in  manner, 
but  kind  and  just,  and  very  helpful  to  boys  who  tried  to 
work.    He  taught  me  shorthand — that  is  to  say,  he  gave  me 
a  sheet  of  paper  with  the  characters  on  it  and  looked  over 
a  few  of  my  early  attempts  to  write ;   and  thus  to  him  I 
owe  one  of  the  two  acquirements  which  represent,  so  far  as 
teaching  is  concerned,  the  greater  part  of  the  advantage  I 
got  from  two  years  of  school  life  at  Edmonton.    The  other 
acquirement  came  from  the  English  master,  a  shy,  awkward, 
shambling  creature  named  Plaice.     He  was  a  man  of  some 
culture.    He  had  once  been  an  actor,  and  had  risen  to  be 
the  understudy  of  some  tragedian  whose  name  I  did  not 
know.      By  strange  by-ways  of  misfortune,   perhaps  of 
misconduct,  he  had  drifted  down  to  be  the  drudge  of  this 
school.    He  spent  his  holidays  there,  for  he  had  no  friends 
to  go  to,  and  there  were  always  some  boys  to  be  looked 
after.    He  was  the  slave  of  the  other  masters  and  the  butt 
of  the  boys.     Condemned  to  ceaseless  labour,  with  very 
little  pay,  and  none  of  the  associations  of  friendship  or 
affection  which  make  poverty  endurable,  he  had  but  one 
pleasure — the   elocution   class.     While  the  boys  were  at 
play  it  was  his  duty  to  be  always  with  them,  but  he  walked 
up  and  down,  up  and  down  by  the  playground  wall,  reading 
or  reciting  scenes  from  the  plays  of  Shakespeare.    He  soon 
took  to  me.     I  was  very  little,  very  quiet,  not  used  to  the 
roughness  of  lads  mostly  a  little  older  than  myself,  and  he 
befriended  me  and  gave  me  the  treasure  which  was  all  he 
had  to  give.     I  was  already  fond  of  poetry,  and  in  my  home 


i8  SCHOOL  [CHAP,  in 

teaching  the  invaluable  art  of  elocution  had  not  been  for- 
gotten. I  had  been  used  to  read  aloud  and  to  recite  the 
hymns  and  religious  poems  which  were  thought  to  be 
suitable.  Now  a  new  literature  came  within  my  ken,  and 
I  used  to  walk  up  and  down  with  him  listening  to  his 
recitation.  Soon  he  took  me  in  hand  and  was  very  kind  and 
patient  with  me,  and  at  the  end  of  1851  when  a  play  was 
performed  in  the  school-room  by  the  elder  boys,  I  came 
on  between  the  parts  and  recited  Othello's  "  Address  to 
the  Senate." 

It  seems  absurd  to  say  it,  but  I  think  it  was  in  the  year 
1850,  when  I  was  only  nine  years  old,  that  the  idea  of  some 
day  being  a  Member  of  Parliament  first  came  into  my  mind. 
It  happened  that  in  the  summer  of  that  year  I  was  at  home 
when  a  great  event  occurred.  The  last  great  debate  in 
the  temporary  House  of  Commons  which  had  been  used 
since  the  fire  of  1837,  tne  Don  Pacifico  debate,  had  been 
expected  to  end  in  the  downfall  of  the  Whig  Government. 
For  five  years,  since  the  betrayal  of  1846,  there  had  been 
division  in  the  Conservative  ranks.  Sir  Robert  Peel  and 
the  notable  group  of  his  followers — Sir  James  Graham, 
Sidney  Herbert,  and  Gladstone  among  them — had  sat  on 
the  front  Opposition  bench  alongside  the  Tory  leaders 
Lord  George  Bentinck  and  Disraeli,  but  without  having 
any  party  association  with  them.  There  were  no  com- 
munications between  the  two  sections  as  to  the  conduct 
of  business  or  debate.  But  in  view  of  the  Don  Pacifico 
discussion  with  its  hopes  of  victory  (promise  of  victory  and 
office)  this  isolation  was  broken  down.  In  joint  council 
it  was  arranged  that  Disraeli  should  close  the  debate  and 
that  Gladstone,  who  then  made  his  first  speech  on  a 
question  of  foreign  politics,  should  follow  Lord  Palmerston. 
Alexander  Cockburn,  called  up  from  his  work  on  the 
Western  Circuit  and  earning  for  himself  the  Solicitor- 
Generalship  six  weeks  later,  and  ultimately  the  Lord 
Chief  Justiceship,  by  obeying  the  summons  which  Crowther 
refused,  said  in  his  speech,  with  a  strange  disregard  of 
parliamentary  usage,  that  he  supposed  they  must  now 


1851-4]  PEEL   AND    WELLINGTON  19 

consider  Gladstone  as  the  leader.  "  Gladstone  vice  Disraeli, 
am  I  to  say  resigned  or  superseded  ?  "  The  attack  did  not 
succeed.  At  4  o'clock  in  the  morning  of  Saturday  June  2Qth 
the  division  was  taken  and  Ministers  had  a  majority  of  forty- 
six.  But  the  joint  action  of  the  Peelites  and  the  Tories 
seemed  to  promise  that  the  quarrels  of  the  last  five  years 
would  be  forgotten  and  that  Peel  and  Stanley,  Disraeli  and 
Gladstone,  would  thenceforth  act  and  probably  very  soon 
triumph  together. 

It  was  otherwise  decreed.  At  4  o'clock  on  that  Saturday 
afternoon  as  Sir  Robert  Peel  was  riding  slowly  up  Con- 
stitution Hill  his  horse  stumbled  and  the  rider  was  carried 
back  to  Whitehall  Place  to  die.  He  lingered  for  three  days. 
On  the  Sunday  afternoon  my  father  took  me  to  Whitehall, 
and  there  a  scattered  crowd  loitered  up  and  down  Parlia- 
ment Street  watching  the  house  where  he  lay.  The  scene 
made  a  great  impression  on  me.  And  I  doubt  not  that 
before  we  reached  home  I  knew  all  that  my  father  could 
tell  me  of  the  life  that  was  so  soon  to  end. 

In  1852 — I  may  as  well  describe  the  scene  now,  for  it 
hangs  in  my  memory  as  a  companion  picture — I  was  brought 
up  from  school  for  a  few  days  to  see  the  funeral  of  the  Duke 
of  Wellington.  On  my  young  mind  the  solemnity  had  a 
great  effect.  The  night  before  the  funeral  my  father  took 
me  to  Ludgate  Hill,  where  in  the  flare  of  torches  workmen 
were  setting  up  great  barricades  of  wood,  while  all  round 
one  heard  the  hammering  at  stands  and  balconies,  and 
saw  the  black  hangings  at  the  windows.  Early  next  day 
we  all  went  in  a  cab  over  London  Bridge,  returning  across 
the  Suspension  Bridge  at  Hungerford  as  the  only  way  by 
which  we  could  be  sure  of  reaching  Buckingham  Street, 
Strand,  where  at  the  London  office  of  a  Sheffield  silversmith 
with  whom  my  father  dealt  we  were  promised  a  window 
to  see  the  funeral  procession.  The  view  was  not  very  good, 
so  my  father  took  me  to  the  end  of  the  street,  where  for 
a  shilling  or  two  we  were  allowed  to  stand  on  a  wooden  box 
or  table. 

There  we   waited   while   the   crowd   grew   dense.      At 


20  SCHOOL  [CHAP,  in 

12  o'clock  guns  told  us  that  the  procession  had  started, 
and  by  and  by  we  heard  in  the  distance  the  heavy  tread 
of  the  soldiers.  On  they  came  ;  thirty  thousand  marching 
in  the  procession.  The  Rifles  in  their  dark  uniform,  march- 
ing with  arms  reversed,  came  first.  Then  for  half  an  hour 
the  monotonous  tramp  of  feet,  the  colours  hung  with  crape  ; 
the  muffled  drums  beating  to  the  funeral  march  ;  the  guns 
throbbing  in  the  distance.  Then  after  many  carriages 
came  the  dead  soldier's  horse  led  along  with  the  boots 
reversed  hanging  from  the  saddle.  Last  the  great  funeral 
car,  the  hat  and  sword  on  the  coffin  which  looked  strangely 
small  on  its  massive  stand.  And  the  silver  trumpets  of 
the  Life  Guards  in  the  wailing  tones  of  the  "  Adeste  Fideles." 

All  lookers-on  uncovered ;  the  people  round  me  sobbed 
like  children,  and  my  father,  always  of  quick  emotion, 
could  hardly  stand  ;  and  I  carried  away  deeply  graven  on 
my  memory  a  scene  which  has  never  in  my  recollection  had 
a  parallel. 

I  return  to  the  story  of  my  life  at  Edmonton,  but  there  is 
not  much  to  tell. 

During  my  second  year  there  my  schoolmaster  and  I 
came  to  love  each  other  very  little.  I  do  not  quite  know 
how  it  came  about,  I  suppose  it  was  partly  my  fault,  and 
yet  I  know  that  I  was  very  keen  to  learn  and  that  it  troubled 
me  much  to  think  how  grieved  and  disappointed  my  parents 
would  be  to  hear  bad  accounts  of  me.  I  had  at  first  done 
so  well.  The  reports  were  excellent ;  I  was  in  the  school 
roll  of  honour  from  which  a  single  punishment  would  have 
excluded  me ;  although  quite  a  junior  boy  I  was  made 
monitor  of  my  dormitory ;  I  got  into  the  second  eleven  of 
the  school  at  cricket;  my  holiday  tasks  were,  of  course, 
always  well  done.  But  something  went  wrong.  I  think 
the  trouble  began  by  my  resenting  some  rough  treatment 
to  which  I  or  another  was  subjected.  Whatever  the  cause 
my  last  six  months  at  Edmonton  were  a  perpetual  storm. 
I  remember  being  beaten  three  times  in  one  day,  twice  in 
the  schoolroom  and  once  in  the  bedroom ;  once  for  some 
misbehaviour  in  school,  the  other  times  because  I  would 


1851-4]  I   LEAVE  COLLEGE   HOUSE  21 

not  beg  pardon  or  cry.  I  should  have  liked  to  cry.  It 
might  have  made  the  pain  seem  less,  or  at  all  events  have 
saved  me  from  more,  but  I  would  have  died  rather  than 
cry — until  indeed  I  was  alone  and  it  would  not  be  a  triumph 
for  my  tyrant. 

Of  course  this  state  of  things  could  only  end  in  one  way. 
There  were  violent  reports  sent  home.  My  poor  mother 
was  in  deep  distress,  and  at  the  end  of  1852,  after  a  stormy 
interview  at  King  William  Street  at  which  I  defended  my- 
self as  best  I  could,  the  pedagogue  took  his  leave  and  my 
country  schooling  ended. 

I  brought  away  from  Edmonton  a  fair  teaching  in  ele- 
mentary subjects  ;  the  two  invaluable  acquirements  already 
mentioned,  and  an  abiding  dislike  to  missionary  societies, 
to  which  out  of  our  scanty  pocket-money  we  had  been 
compelled  to  contribute. 

But  I  brought  with  me  something  better  than  all — good 
health.  The  food  at  school  was  plentiful  and  good ; 
the  hours  of  study  were  short ;  the  playground  and  the 
cricket-field  were  large  and  open  to  the  country,  and  I, 
who  went  there  a  pale-faced  and  delicate  child  subject  to 
painful  headaches,  came  back  as  a  lad  of  twelve,  not  indeed 
sturdy  or  strong,  but  so  much  changed  for  the  better  that 
there  was  never  afterwards  any  reason  for  anxiety  about 
me.  I  brought  with  me  also  one  long-abiding  friendship. 
Robert  Pottle,  whose  father  had  a  newsvendor's  business 
at  the  back  of  the  Royal  Exchange  which  he  himself  after- 
wards carried  on,  was  rather  older  and  much  stronger  than 
I,  and  used  always  to  stand  by  me  in  school  troubles.  He 
had  a  charming  mother  and  two  pretty  sisters.  I  became 
a  very  frequent  visitor  at  their  house  in  the  New  North 
Road,  and  my  friendship  with  him,  a  manly  and  generous 
soul,  lasted  until  his  death  fifty  years  after  we  first  met  at 
Edmonton. 

Again  a  school  had  to  be  found  for  me,  and  again  there 

was  found  exactly  the  school  I  needed.     My  mother  would 

not  let  me  go  away  from  home  again,  so  I  was  sent  to  the 

City  Commercial  School  in  George  Yard,  Lombard  Street, 

3 


22  SCHOOL  [CHAP,  in 

In  a  low-roofed  building,  the  site  of  which  can  easily  be 
found,  for  ancient  lights  have  kept  down  the  bank  which 
has  replaced  it  to  a  low  level  of  height,  one  William  Pinches 
kept  a  school  which  he  had  established  in  1830.  The 
conditions  of  life  in  the  City  of  London  were  very  different 
from  those  which  are  found  to-day.  Now  the  square  mile 
of  its  area  has  a  population  of  housekeepers,  and  caretakers, 
and  police,  and  firemen,  and  there  is  little  need  of  day  schools 
for  its  twenty  thousand  residents.  But  in  1841  the  traders 
and  their  families  lived  at  their  places  of  business  and  the 
population  was  over  six  times  that  number.  From  the 
first  the  school  prospered.  The  education  was  to  be  had 
cheaply.  There  was  no  teaching  of  Greek ;  some  of  the 
elder  boys  learned  Latin,  for  the  sake  of  the  grammar  and 
not  of  the  language  ;  German  was  an  extra  rarely  indulged 
in  ;  and  French  was  only  permitted  as  a  privilege  of  the 
higher  classes.  But  the  essentials  of  a  good  English  educa- 
tion were  soundly  taught. 

To  write  clearly,  to  cypher  quickly,  to  read  aloud  with 
intelligent  emphasis  and  to  be  accurate  in  grammar  and 
spelling — these  the  schoolmaster  rightly  thought  were  the 
essentials.  Let  these  be  mastered  and  everything  else  in 
the  way  of  learning  will  come  when  it  is  wanted.  But 
many  other  things  were  well  taught.  History,  ancient 
and  modern,  geography,  elementary  science,  geometrical 
drawing,  found  their  place  in  an  excellent  system  of  in- 
struction. And  the  charge  for  all  this  was  only  six  pounds 
a  year.  I  will  try  to  sketch  the  person  and  the  character 
of  the  teacher  to  whom  I  owe  a  great  debt  of  gratitude. 

A  short,  stout,  broad-shouldered  man,  active  in  move- 
ment, precise  in  dress ;  the  invariable  black  tailed  coat 
always  well  brushed,  the  wide  open  waistcoat  displaying  a 
snowy  shirt,  at  the  throat  the  small  black  tie  under  a  turned- 
down  collar  which  denoted  one  whose  model  in  youth  had 
been  Lord  Byron.  A  round  smiling  face  above  which  the 
scanty  light  hair  was  now  silvering.  The  kindest  blue  eyes 
sparkling  through,  or  more  often  under,  a  pair  of  gold- 
rimmed  spectacles.  A  small  mouth  "  where  smiles  went 


1851-4]  CITY    COMMERCIAL   SCHOOL  23 

out  and  in,"  but  close  pressed  and  hard  when  any  fault, 
especially  if  it  were  a  fault  of  meanness  or  unfairness, 
excited  his  short-lived  anger.  A  voice  clear  and  strong  and 
trained  to  excellent  elocution.  A  patience  which  nothing 
could  tire  ;  a  nobility  and  generosity  of  soul  which  shone 
through  all  the  monotonous  toil  of  his  daily  life ;  a  deep 
and  earnest  piety  which  found  expression  in  his  loving 
sympathy  with  every  boy  who  came  under  his  rule  and  tried 
to  do  his  work  honestly — this,  as  well  as  I  can  draw  it,  is  the 
picture  of  the  man  under  whom  I  was  so  fortunate  as  to 
spend  two  happy  years. 

I  came  to  him  in  a  state  of  mind  which  fitted  me  to  profit 
by  the  good  influences  of  the  school.  I  was  sore  and  dis- 
appointed with  the  failure  at  Edmonton,  but  it  was  the 
unconcealed  sorrow  of  my  father  and  mother  which  pressed 
upon  me  most.  I  knew  that  I  had  it  in  me  to  learn  and  to 
succeed,  and  I  went  to  George  Yard  resolved  to  wipe  out 
my  own  shame  and  their  regrets  and  misgivings.  They 
were  indeed  soon  wiped  out.  There  is  nothing  of  moment 
to  tell  about  the  school  life  of  those  two  years,  but  it  was 
a  steady  progress  to  the  top  of  the  school.  There  were  no 
alternations  of  credit  and  disgrace  ;  I  never  had  a  punish- 
ment ;  I  do  not  think  I  ever  vexed  the  dear  master  whom 
I  loved  and  whose  friendship  and  counsel  were  given  me 
until  his  death. 

There  was  one  side  of  the  school  life  which  I  must  mention 
separately.  Again  my  constant  good  fortune  had  brought 
me  to  one  who  found  his  chief  enjoyment  in  poetry  and  the 
dramatic  art.  Elocution  was  taught  to  all  whose  parents 
had  intelligence  enough  to  permit  the  study.  And  once  a  year 
an  entertainment  was  given  at  the  Jews  and  General  Literary 
and  Scientific  Institution  at  Sussex  Hall,  Leadenhall  Street. 
I  was  in  my  time  the  show  boy  of  the  school.  At  three 
of  these  Christmas  gatherings  (for  my  supremacy  was  so 
great  that,  contrary  to  all  rule,  I  was  asked  to  recite  a  year 
after  I  had  left  the  school)  I  spoke  the  last  piece  in  the 
programme.  These  were  great  nights.  The  hall  was 
filled  with  parents  and  friends.  The  boys  were  in  their 


24  SCHOOL  [CHAP.  Itt 

evening  dress  of  black  jacket  and  black  tie,  the  master  sat 
at  the  side  of  the  platform  with  lips  moving  as  he  followed 
every  word  of  every  recitation,  and  his  kind  eyes  sparkling 
with  fun  or  fire  according  as  the  piece  was  gay  or  grave. 

I  had  no  rival  present  in  the  school,  but  even  I  could 
not  hold  my  own  against  the  memory  of  one  who  had  just 
left.  Whenever  I  had  done  anything  particularly  well  I 
used  to  hear  "  Very  good,  Clarke,  very  good,  but  I  wish 
you  could  have  heard  Brodribb  say  that."  I  used  to  hate 
that  absent  paragon,  but  did  not  know  him  until  many 
years  later,  when  I  met  him  at  Hain  Friswell's  house  in 
Great  Russell  Street,  and  formed  a  close  and  long  enduring 
friendship  with  Henry  Irving. 

One  word  more  on  the  subject.  The  habit  of  learning 
poetry,  early  acquired  and  diligently  kept  up,  has  been  a 
comfort  and  companionship  to  me  ever  since,  and  the 
pieces  I  recited  at  Sussex  Hall — Coleridge's  "  Ode  to  Mont 
Blanc,"  Campbell's  "Hallowed  Ground,"  Bell's  "Mary 
Queen  of  Scots,"  Halleck's  "  Marco  Bozzaris,"  and  Thacke- 
ray's "  End  of  the  Play" — have  been  precious  possessions. 

My  studies  at  George  Yard  came  to  an  end  too  soon.  I 
was  not  yet  fourteen,  but  three  younger  children  had  to  be 
educated,  and  I  might  be  of  use  in  the  shop,  so  in  December 
1854  my  school  life  closed. 


CHAPTER    IV 

THE   SHOP  :     1855-1858 

ON  January  ist,  1855,  I  nrst  went  to  help  in  my  father's 
shop,  and  my  service  there  continued  until  nearly  the  end 
of  the  year  1858.  It  was  not  an  unpleasant  life,  for  although 
the  hours  were  long  and  the  monotony  somewhat  irksome, 
I  had  the  constant  pleasure  of  the  companionship  of  my 
father,  and  I  soon  found  time  for  a  good  deal  of  reading. 
The  days  were  all  alike,  so  I  will  describe  one.  At  eight 
o'clock  the  shutters  were  taken  down,  and  while  the  boy 
swept  and  dusted  we  had  breakfast  upstairs.  At  nine  my 
father  and  I  both  went  down  and  the  door  was  unlocked. 
Then  I  got  out  the  trays  of  the  small  and  valuable  goods 
which  had  been  put  in  the  safe  the  night  before,  and  my 
father  arranged  the  window  while  I  brushed  and  dusted 
the  things  as  I  handed  them  to  him.  Afterwards,  but 
before  customers  were  expected,  some  of  the  plated  goods 
were  taken  down  and  with  whiting  and  brush  and  rouge 
and  leather  were  made  as  bright  as  could  be.  Then  came 
the  time  for  going  to  the  manufacturers.  There  were  orders 
to  be  sent,  goods  to  be  fetched  which  had  been  sent  for 
repair ;  requests  to  be  taken  for  goods  wanted  for  inspec- 
tion ;  patterns  to  be  asked  for,  jobs  to  be  taken  for  repair ; 
silver  goods  which  had  been  sold  had  often  to  go  to  the 
engraver.  To  Eady 's  in  Red  Lion  Street,  Clerkenwell ;  to 
Pa  ton  the  jeweller  in  Northampton  Street ;  to  Kemp 
the  cameo  brooch-maker  in  Meredith  Street,  Clerkenwell ; 
to  Hasluck  the  jeweller  in  Hatton  Garden  ;  to  Barnard  the 
silversmith  in  King  Edward  Street ;  to  Day  the  little 
working  jeweller  in  Paternoster  Row  ;  to  Stauffer  the  watch- 

25 


26  THE   SHOP  [CHAP,  iv 

maker  in  the  Old  Jewry — this  was  a  usual  round.  It  would 
take  me  until  dinner  time.  Then  after  dinner  there  were 
parcels  to  take  to  customers,  to  Edgar  P.  Stringer  at  W.  S. 
Lindsay's  in  Austin  Friars ;  to  H.  W.  Ripley  at  Mincing 
Lane  ;  to  Thomas  Treloar  at  42,  Ludgate  Hill ;  now  and 
then  as  far  as  to  Frederick  Salmon,  the  great  surgeon  at 
Manchester  Square.  Of  course  I  was  not  at  first  trusted 
with  valuable  parcels.  But  it  was  soon  found  that  my 
errands  were  quickly  done.  In  truth  I  hurried  along  the 
streets  in  dread  of  the  rough  boys  who  used  to  jeer  at  me 
and  sometimes  strike  me  in  sheer  wanton  brutality,  seeing 
that  I  was  too  small  to  resist.  There  is  a  shop  in  the 
Goswell  Road,  close  by  the  western  end  of  Old  Street,  which 
I  never  pass  without  recalling  the  day  when  at  that  spot  a 
big  boy  snatched  off  my  cap  and  flung  it  in  the  street, 
leaving  me  to  pick  it  from  the  mud  and  laughing  at  my 
impotent  anger.  In  the  afternoon  there  was  sometimes 
another  visit  to  Clerkenwell. 

But  generally  there  was  nothing  to  do  until  three  o'clock. 
The  customers  were  so  few  that  sometimes  an  hour  would 
pass  without  the  shop  door  being  opened.  That  was  my 
happy  time.  At  the  back  of  the  shop  counter  against  the 
wall  was  a  shelf  covered  with  red  baize  on  which  the  odds 
and  ends  of  the  business,  jobs  repaired  or  waiting  to  be 
repaired,  and  goods  obtained  to  be  shown  to  customers, 
used  to  be  placed.  On  that  I  would  put  my  book. 

There  was  only  one  stool  behind  the  counter,  and  indeed 
my  father  did  not  often  indulge  himself  in  the  luxury  of 
sitting  down  ;  he  thought  it  looked  unbusinesslike  if  a 
customer  came  in. 

But  at  this  baize-covered  shelf  I  would  stand  for  hours 
reading,  chiefly  poetry  and  history.  I  lived  for  a  long 
time  on  Hume  and  Gibbon  and  Shakespeare,  but  Scott's 
novels  were  often  in  my  hand,  and  my  father  did  not  mind 
what  I  read  so  long  as  I  was  quiet  and  ready  to  do  anything 
that  was  wanted. 

At  first  he  strongly  objected  to  books  in  the  shop.  His 
scheme  for  my  future  was  that  I  should  work  hard  a,t 


1855-8]  A   WICKED   ACT  27 

extending  the  trade,  that  some  day  I  should  be  his  partner, 
and  that  after  he  was  gone  I  should  carry  on  the  business  in 
the  name  which  he  was  justly  proud  of  having  added  .to 
the  honourable  roll  of  City  tradesmen.  But  my  mother  had 
dreams  of  a  different  fate  for  me.  My  father  submitted,  as 
he  almost  always  did,  to  her  stronger  will,  and  my  reading 
was  allowed  to  go  on. 

There  was  one  incident  in  my  early  days  in  the  shop 
which  I  am  reluctant  to  record.  But  I  am  telling  the  story 
of  a  real  life,  not  an  imaginary  one,  and  I  do  not  think  I 
have  the  right  to  leave  it  out.  One  day,  yielding  to  some 
temptation  for  which  I  cannot  account,  I  stole  some  money, 
two  or  three  shillings,  from  the  till.  I  forget  how  the 
theft  was  found  out,  but  it  was,  and  that  promptly. 

I  suppose  the  loss  was  noticed,  and  that  the  book  was 
found  which  I  had  bought  with  the  stolen  money.  It  was 
A  Pair  of  Gloves,  by  J.  Hain  Friswell.  I  can  recall  the  look 
of  the  white  bound  volume  with  the  picture  of  a  glove  on 
the  cover.  I  remember  my  father's  anger  and  my  mother's 
tears.  What  excuse  was  found  for  me  I  know  not,  but  I 
do  not  think  the  punishment  was  severe.  Perhaps  they 
thought,  and  if  they  did  they  were  right,  that  the  recollec- 
tion of  that  sin  would  haunt  me  with  a  punishment  which 
would  last  beyond  their  lives.1 

My  first  move  outside  the  home  life  came  in  a  curious 
way.  A  Mr.  Selfe,  who  was  the  parish  clerk  of  one  of  the 
City  Churches,  used  to  hold  a  Bible  class  for  young  men  at 
Salisbury  Square,  Fleet  Street,  in  connection  with  the 
Church  of  England  Young  Men's  Society,  which  was  then 
just  removing  to  a  house  in  Fleet  Street  close  to  the  Church 
of  St.  Dunstan  and  on  its  eastern  side. 

1  It  is  a  curious  fact  that  the  story  of  this  book  turned  upon  our  stupid 
and  cruel  law  which  would  not  allow  a  wife  to  give  evidence  for  her 
husband.  In  the  story  a  man  is  charged  with  a  crime.  He  has  passed 
the  night  on  which  it  was  committed  with  the  woman  he  loves.  She 
sacrifices  herself  to  save  him,  confesses  she  is  not  his  wife,  and  so  is  able 
to  give  the  evidence  that  procures  his  acquittal.  It  was  not  until  forty 
years  later  that  I  was  able  to  help  in  the  removal  of  this  stain  on  our 
administration  of  justice  by  the  passing  of  the  Criminal  Evidence  Act  of 
5898.  I  hope  I  thereby  made  some  atonement  for  my  sin. 


28  THE   SHOP  [CHAP,  iv 

I  was  taken  to  him  by  my  father,  who  commended  me  to 
his  care,  and  so  I,  for  the  first  time,  obtained  access  to  a 
library.  There  was  also  a  debating  class  which  attracted 
me.  But  I  soon  got  into  trouble. 

The  air  was  at  that  time  full  of  the  Romish  controversy, 
and  resentment  at  the  Papal  aggression  of  1851  was  very 
hot.  Cardinal  Wiseman  had  lately  published  his  Appeal 
to  the  People  of  England,  and  the  chief  occupation  of  the 
debating  class  was  to  reply,  to  their  own  great  satisfaction, 
to  the  arguments  of  this  book. 

At  each  meeting  a  chapter  was  read  and  then  the  members 
in  turn  tried  to  answer  it.  The  chief  combatant  on  the 
Protestant  side  was  a  supercilious  young  watch-maker  in 
Farringdon  Street  named  Snosswell. 

One  night  I  ventured  to  suggest  that  he  had  not  the  best 
of  the  argument,  and  thenceforward  I  was  looked  upon 
with  some  suspicion.  Again,  I  found  that  the  library  did 
not  contain  a  copy  of  Shakespeare's  works.  So  in  the 
suggestion  book  I  proposed  that  one  should  be  bought. 

Snosswell  was  shocked,  and  his  name  headed  the  list  of 
those  who  protested  against  the  purchase.  The  Society 
was  pretty  evenly  divided,  and  the  Committee  endeavoured 
to  please  both  sides  by  getting  a  copy  of  Bowdler's  edition. 
I  remained  a  member  for  some  years  and  occasionally  gave 
readings  and  lectures  at  the  rooms,  but  I  never  got  any 
real  good  out  of  the  Society,  except  the  friendship  of  Robert 
and  George  Warington,  the  sons  of  the  resident  chemist  at 
the  Apothecaries'  Hall.  In  later  years  Robert  was  himself 
a  distinguished  chemist.  George  wrote  under  the  title  of 
"  A  Layman  "  the  best  answer  to  Bishop  Colenso,  was 
ordained  by  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  wrote  an 
admirable  little  book  on  "  Inspiration/'  and  died  early  in 
South  Africa,  where  he  went  to  try  to  stave  off  the  attack 
of  consumption. 

It  was  not  long  before  I  found  my  way  to  the  institution 
which  did  more  for  me  than  all  the  other  agencies  of  self- 
culture  of  which  I  in  turn  availed  myself. 

In  the  year  1849  two  City  clergymen,  the  Rev,  Charles 


1855-8]  EVENING   CLASSES  29 

Mackenzie,  rector  of  Allhallows,  Lombard  Street,  and  the 
Rev.  Richard  Whittington,  a  mathematical  master  at  the 
Merchant-Taylors'  School  and  Evening  Lecturer  at  St. 
Peter's,  Cornhill,  formed  a  plan  to  establish  in  every  city 
parish,  as  part  of  the  Church  organisation,  evening  classes 
for  young  men,  where  the  ordinary  subjects  of  commercial 
education  should  be  very  cheaply  taught. 

In  its  original  shape  the  scheme  did  not  succeed.  But 
a  few  years  later  such  classes  as  had  been  formed  were 
concentrated  at  Crosby  Hall,  Bishopsgate  Street,  which 
by  the  liberality  of  Miss  Hackett,  whom  Mr.  Mackenzie 
interested  in  the  project,  was  rescued  from  its  degradation 
as  a  furniture  warehouse  and  turned  into  an  admirably 
equipped  literary  institution. 

The  two  founders  were  both  notable  men,  but  of  very 
different  types. 

Charles  Mackenzie  was  a  churchman  of  the  type  then 
known  as  High  and  Dry.  He  was  a  poor  preacher ;  had 
no  great  literary  capacity,  nor  the  contagious  enthusiasm 
of  a  great  reformer.  His  manner  was  sedate,  his  speech 
deliberate ;  there  was  nothing  very  attractive  in  the  precision 
of  his  language  and  the  calmness,  almost  severity,  of  his 
aspect.  But  he  was  a  man  of  firm  resolve,  of  boundless 
courage,  and  of  inexhaustible  patience,  and  he  had  deter- 
mined to  give  all  that  he  had  in  time  or  money  or  influence 
to  the  service  of  the  young  men  of  the  City  of  London. 
"  Difficulties,"  said  he  one  day,  "  are  things  to  be  got  over." 
And  from  1849  to  the  time  of  his  death  in  1888  the  heavy 
burden  of  this  work  fell  chiefly  upon  him. 

Richard  Whittington  was  an  earnest  evangelical  in 
religion,  a  quiet  unassuming  worker,  gentle  and  sympa- 
thetic, who  gave  ungrudgingly  all  his  scanty  leisure  to 
teaching  and  administering  at  the  evening  classes.  Yet 
during  the  lifetime  of  Charles  Mackenzie  he  would  always 
try  to  modestly  efface  himself  when  any  public  oppor- 
tunity was  given  for  recognising  the  great  work  which  he 
and  his  colleague  were  doing.  After  Charles  Mackenzie's 
cleath  he  took  the  post  of  Principal,  and  Chairman  of  the 


3<>  THE   SHOP  [CHAP,  iv 

Governing  Body,  and  held  the  last-named  office  until  I 
succeeded  him  in  1898. 

At  these  classes  I  worked  steadily  for  about  four  years. 
One  guinea  a  year  gave  (as  it  still  gives)  entrance  to  the 
library  and  reading-room,  admission  to  the  weekly  lectures, 
and  membership  of  one  class  of  twelve  lessons  in  any  subject 
in  each  of  the  three  terms  of  the  year.  The  classes  were 
well  arranged  and  with  well-trained  teachers,  and  I  set  to 
work  in  earnest.  English  history,  political  economy,  French, 
and  elocution  were  my  principal  class  subjects,  and  I  be- 
came a  regular  attendant  at  the  debating  society.  Some  of 
the  classes  met  at  6  or  7  o'clock,  so  when  I  went  to  them 
my  day  in  the  shop  would  end  at  tea-time  instead  of  as  on 
other  days  when  the  shop  closed  at  8  o'clock. 

But  some  kind  friend  lent  me  a  reader's  medal  for  the 
library  of  the  London  Institution  in  Finsbury  Circus,  and 
when  shop  was  shut,  if  it  was  not  a  class  night,  I  would  run 
over  there  for  an  hour's  reading  before  supper. 

My  passion  for  work  soon  attracted  attention,  and  Mr. 
Mackenzie  and  Mr.  Whittington  both  took  the  kindliest 
interest  in  me. 

I  have  a  copy  of  the  British  Poets  in  four  volumes,  in  the 
first  of  which  is  written  : 

Presented  to  Edward  George  Clarke  by  his  most  sincere 
friend  the  Rev.  Richard  Whittington  in  testimony  of  the 
pleasure  he  experienced  at  his  distinguished  position  in  a 
recent  examination  at  Crosby  Hall,  May  1856. 

That  prize  sowed  the  harvest  of  many  others. 

I  had  thus  distinguished  myself  at  the  evening  classes, 
and  I  looked  round  for  a  larger  world  to  conquer.  The 
same  year  brought  a  great  opportunity. 

In  1856  the  Society  of  Arts,  inspired  by  Harry  Chester 
and  Peter  Le  Neve  Foster,  set  on  foot  a  system  of  examina- 
tions open  to  all  members  of  evening  classes  or  mechanics' 
institutions,  and  they  offered  handsome  prizes  in  money. 

I  with  some  of  my  friends  at  Crosby  Hall  determined  to 
compete,  and  we  were  examined  at  the  Society's  rooms  in 


1855-8]  SOCIETY   OF   ARTS'   PRIZE  31 

John  Street,  Adelphi.  At  this  first  examination  fortunately 
for  me  there  were  not  many  competitors.  I  went  up  in 
English  Literature  and  English  History.  Hamlet  was  the 
prescribed  play  of  Shakespeare,  and  we  had  to  write  an 
essay  upon  it.  I  do  not  know  where  I  got  the  idea,  it 
could  hardly  have  been  original  in  a  boy  of  fifteen,  but  I 
argued,  what  I  firmly  believe  to-day,  that  the  secret  of  the 
play  is  to  be  found  in  the  fact  that  Hamlet  had  seduced 
Ophelia.  I  remember  nothing  more  about  the  examination, 
but  when  the  prize  list  came  out  the  Crosby  Hall  Evening 
Classes  had  beaten  all  other  institutions ;  we  had  three 
prizes  out  of  six.  I  was  first  in  English  Literature  ;  Thomas 
Brodribb  (no  relation  to  Irving)  was  prizeman  in  French, 
and  Thomas  Ross  Howard  took  the  prize  in  German.  It 
was  a  time  of  great  joy  at  home.  Much  was  said  publicly 
about  the  examinations,  and  the  prizes  were  distributed 
by  Sir  John  Pakington  before  a  crowded  room  at  the  Society 
of  Arts. 

My  prize  was  ten  guineas,  a  quite  magnificent  sum  ;  and 
I  had  much  consideration  as  to  what  I  should  do  with  it. 
The  decision  was  left  entirely  to  me,  so  I  spent  half  the 
money  upon  an  edition  of  Hallam's  works  in  ten  volumes, 
and  the  other  half  was  reserved  for  a  walking  trip  round 
the  coast  of  Kent  in  the  autumn  of  1858. 

It  seems  to  me  now  that  at  seventeen  I  was  rather  young 
to  start  out  alone  upon  a  walking  trip,  and  I  dare  say  my 
parents  thought  so  too,  for  the  dear  father  came  down  to 
Eastbourne  with  me  by  a  Sunday  excursion  train  to  set  me 
on  my  journey,  and  see  that  I  was  properly  housed  for  the 
first  night.  What  a  delight  that  journey  was!  With  a 
bag  slung  over  my  shoulder  I  marched  along  in  the  pride 
of  independence.  From  Eastbourne  towards  Hastings  I 
walked,  lingering  so  long  at  Pevensey  that  the  night  fell 
and  the  great  comet  spread  its  bright  scimitar  in  the  heavens, 
and  I  lost  my  way  and  had  to  get  a  friendly  coast-guardsman 
from  a  Martello  tower  to  guide  me  to  the  little  country 
railway  station  at  Bexhill. 

Next  morning  to  Hurstmonceux,  thinking  much  of  Sterling 


32  THE   SHOP  [CHAP,  iv 

(for  I  already  knew  the  charming  life  which  was  almost  the 
only  thing  Carlyle  ever  wrote  in  decent  English),  and  on  to 
Battle  and  so  back  to  Hastings. 

Thence  the  next  day  to  Lovers'  Seat  and  Fairlight  Glen, 
and  across  the  hilts  to  Winchelsea  and  Rye.  The  train 
was  taken  from  Ashford  to  Folkestone,  for  the  road  would 
have  been  long  and  dull.  But  thenceforward  I  kept  to  my 
walking,  and  Dover,  Ramsgate,  Broadstairs,  and  Margate 
were  taken  in  turn. 

I  wrote  a  letter  home  every  night,  slept  like  a  top, 
spouted  poetry  to  myself  as  I  walked  along,  and  came 
back  in  about  a  week's  time  with  memories  that  have  lasted 
a  lifetime,  and  with  a  good  deal  of  my  five  guineas  left. 

That  was  the  first  of  many  tramps.  In  Surrey  and  Kent 
and  Berkshire  ;  twice  in  Wales  ;  in  Devon  and  Wilts  and 
Cornwall ;  round  the  western  coast  from  Lynton  to  the 
Lizard  Point,  I  have  walked  with  a  knapsack  on  my  back, 
and  have  learned  to  know  and  love  our  dear  and  beautiful 
island  as  only  one  who  walks  alone  can  do. 

Two  people  can  no  more  see  a  landscape  than  they  can 
write  a  poem.  You  either  know  your  companion,  and 
then  you  talk  about  the  things  you  talk  of  every  day  and 
your  brain  gets  no  change  of  air,  or  you  do  not  know  him, 
and  then  you  most  likely  do  not  talk  at  all  and  only  in- 
convenience each  other  by  your  difference  in  plans  and 
tastes.  One  hardly  ever  sees  a  knapsack  now. 

I  grieve  to  note  that  a  pleasure  so  cheap,  so  healthful, 
so  full  of  independence,  is  so  little  known. 

I  now  set  to  work  with  more  spirit  and  hope  than  ever. 
That  winter  the  spaces  of  leisure  at  the  baize-covered 
shelf  and  the  hours  after  the  shop  was  closed  were  spent 
in  hard  study,  and  when  the  next  examination  of  the  Society 
of  Arts  was  held  in  1857  I  was  first  prizeman  in  English 
History,  and  had  a  certificate  in  Political  Economy. 

The  year  1858  brought  its  examination  and  its  success. 
In  that  year  the  University  of  Oxford  resolved  to  hold 
examinations  open  to  those  who  were  not  members  of  the 
University,  and  to  confer  the  new  title  of  Associate  in  Arts. 


1855-8]         ASSOCIATE   IN   ARTS,   OXFORD  33 

Directly  the  date  and  subjects  were  announced  I  set  to 
work,  and  for  several  months  devoted  my  studies  to  this 
examination. 

I  was  to  be  examined  at  Oxford,  and  when  the  time  came 
my  father  took  me  there  and  found  lodging  for  me  at  the 
Maidenhead  Hotel,  Turl  Street.  What  a  glorious  time  it 
was  for  a  London  boy!  The  colleges  and  gardens  and 
libraries  were  all  open  to  candidates.  Dr.  Sewell  of  New 
(I  did  not  see  him  afterwards  until  forty-four  years  later 
when  I  went  to  Oxford  to  enter  my  younger  son  at  Magdalen 
and  found  him  Master  of  his  old  college)  was  the  prime- 
mover  in  the  new  scheme  and  its  indefatigable  secretary, 
and  Professor  Donkin  entertained  us  at  a  soiree  at  the 
Bodleian.  There  were  three  or  four  days  of  examination, 
and  then  I  went  home  and  waited  anxiously  for  the  result. 
It  was  a  success  beyond  all  expectation. 

One  morning  the  list  was  in  the  paper,  and  a  letter  came 
at  the  same  time  to  tell  me  that  I  was  first  in  order  of  merit 
in  the  first  division,  and  so  had  the  honour  of  being  the 
first  Associate  in  Arts  of  the  University  of  Oxford. 

I  rushed  over  to  the  old  school,  and  the  eyes  of  my  dear 
old  teacher  filled  with  joy  as  he  pressed  my  hand  ;  and  then 
I  asked  for  a  half-holiday  for  the  school,  and  the  boys 
shouted  and  rattled  the  covers  of  their  desks,  and  another 
step  in  my  career  was  won. 

But  that  year  was  a  momentous  one  to  me  in  another 
respect.  I  met  and  fell  in  love  with  the  girl  who  afterwards 
became  my  wife.  It  happened  in  this  wise.  The  members 
of  the  evening  classes  used  to  have  an  annual  excursion. 
We  usually  went  to  the  Rye  House,  Broxbourne,  but  in  this 
year  we  chose  Hampton  Court.  My  friend,  Tom  Howard, 
whom  I  have  mentioned  as  one  of  the  three  prizemen  in 
1856,  brought  with  him  two  cousins,  Annie  and  Fanny 
Mitchell.  From  the  former,  somewhat  I  fear  to  his  annoy- 
ance, I  could  not  keep  away.  We  wandered  through  the 
rooms  and  gardens  of  Hampton  Court  Palace ;  we  dined 
at  the  Castle  Hotel  at  Molesey  and  danced  in  the  garden 
behind  the  house.  I  thought  (and  I  think  now)  that  I  had 


34  THE   SHOP  [CHAP,  iv 

never  seen  any  one  so  lovable  and  so  sweet.  She  was  very 
pretty,  with  dark  hair  and  beautiful  dark  brown  eyes,  a 
serious,  thoughtful  face,  lighting  up  into  radiant  smiles ; 
tiny  hands  and  feet ;  her  figure  small  and  trim  ;  her  carriage 
easy  and  graceful ;  her  voice  low  and  musical ;  her  dancing 
perfect. 

As  the  evening  drew  on  some  one  suggested  that  we 
should  walk  beside  the  river  on  the  Palace  side  to  Kingston 
and  there  take  train  to  London.  I  remember  that  walk  as 
if  it  were  yesterday.  For  me  the  stars  had  never  shone  so 
brightly,  the  river  had  never  looked  so  sweet.  But  at 
Kingston  there  was  dismay.  No  one  of  us  had  known 
exactly  how  far  from  Kingston  Bridge  the  station  was.  We 
hurried  when  we  thought  our  time  was  short,  but  without 
avail.  When  we  reached  the  station  the  last  train  was 
gone.  We  had  to  club  together  our  remaining  funds  and 
find  a  flyman  who  would  drive  us  to  London. 

The  girls  were  frightened,  and  I  think  Howard  and  I 
were  rather  nervous  as  to  what  would  happen,  but  we 
reached  home  soon  after  midnight  and  found  our  people, 
who  had  been  sending  from  house  to  house  for  news,  so 
relieved  at  our  safety  that  they  were  not  inclined  to  scold. 
As  we  drove  home  that  night,  there  came  into  my  mind 
the  thought  that  my  life  would  be  a  happy  one  if  I  could 
gain  Anne  Mitchell  for  my  wife. 

That  thought  was  never  dispossessed  or  even  disturbed. 
There  were  difficulties  and  some  estrangements.  When  we 
met  I  was  only  seventeen,  while  she  was  three  years  older, 
and  at  that  age  the  difference  looked  serious. 

But  that  day  gave  me  "  the  noblest  master  under  heaven 
—the  maiden  passion  for  a  maid,"  and  from  that  day  no 
love  for  another  entered  my  heart. 

Thenceforward  her  sweet  face  shone  through  all  my 
hopes  and  ambitions.  Before  I  was  nineteen  I  was  engaged 
to  her,  and  seven  years  later  I  found  in  the  happiness  of 
marriage  the  reward  and  justification  of  my  long  faithful- 
ness. 

In  that  autumn  a  great  change  took  place  in  the  home 


1855-8]       WE   LEAVE   KING   WILLIAM   STREET         35 

life.  The  lease  of  the  house  at  King  William  Street  came 
to  an  end,  and  the  owner  asked  a  rent  nearly  double  what 
my  father  had  been  paying.  The  business  could  not  sup- 
port such  a  burden,  so  a  lease  was  taken  of  No.  38  (now 
No.  71)  Moorgate  .Street,  where  the  fact  that  the  first  floor 
was  let  to  a  solicitor  brought  the  rent  within  a  reasonable 
figure.  So  in  September  the  change  was  made.  It  was  a 
pain  to  leave  the  home  in  which  our  happy  childhood  had 
been  spent,  but  to  me  the  change  was  very  welcome.  Hence- 
forth it  would  not  be  necessary  for  me  to  sleep  in  the  shop. 

To  sleep  in  a  bedroom,  where  I  could  study  at  night,  and 
where  I  had  my  books,  and  where  my  eyes  did  not  open 
every  morning  to  the  occupation  and  association  which  were 
least  congenial  to  me,  was  a  delight  no  one  could  measure 
who  had  not  gone  through  my  experience  of  the  last  ten 
years.  One  evening  in  September  the  stock  in  King  William 
Street,  amazingly  small  in  bulk,  was  put  on  a  hand  cart, 
and  my  father  and  I  walked  beside  it  up  to  Moorgate  Street. 
There  all  was  ready  ;  some  new  stock  had  been  got  in,  and 
next  morning  we  were  in  the  new  shop,  hoping  that  the  old 
customers  would  follow  and  new  ones  soon  be  found. 

But  I  was  not  long  there.  Gradually  my  dear  father  had 
been  reconciling  himself  to  the  inevitable  separation. 

It  was  clear  that  I  should  not  always  stay  in  the  trivial 
labours  and  possibilities  of  the  shop.  So  he  had  become 
somewhat  resigned  to  the  idea  that  he  would  soon  lose  me, 
and  that  he  must  look  forward  to  finding  his  partner  and 
successor  in  my  youngest  brother.  Of  my  other  brother 
Joseph  I  shall  have  something  to  say  by  and  by. 

Now  at  the  very  moment  that  I  needed  it  one  of  the 
strange  and  unlooked-for  opportunities  of  my  life  displayed 
itself.  I  had  won  a  prize  at  the  first  examination  of  the 
Society  of  Arts ;  I  had  become  the  first  Associate  in  Arts 
at  the  first  Oxford  middle-class  examination  ;  now  for  the 
first  time  an  open  examination  was  to  be  held  for  some 
Government  clerkships. 

Lord  Stanley  was  Secretary  of  State  for  India,  and  he 
offered  eight  writerships  in  the  India  Office  for  competition. 


36  THE   SHOP  [CHAP,  iv 

The  salary  was  £80,  but  there  were  allowances  and  extras 
which  would  probably  raise  it  to  £150.  When  the  applica- 
tions came  in  the  authorities  were  alarmed. 

Seven  hundred  candidates  offered  themselves.  Of  these 
three  hundred  withdrew  before  the  day  of  examination,  but 
four  hundred  were  actually  examined  at  Willis's  Rooms. 
I  had  been  working  my  hardest.  There  was  no  question 
now  of  the  claims  of  the  shop.  Those  were  set  aside,  and 
for  two  months  I  was  at  work  from  eight  in  the  morning  to 
twelve  at  night.  The  whole  family  tried  to  help  me.  There 
was  a  little  book  called  A  Guide  to  English  History.  It 
was  crammed  with  dates.  All  the  chief  events  in  every 
reign  were  very  briefly  stated,  and  at  the  end  of  each  reign 
there  was  a  list  of  the  notable  men  who  flourished  in  it  with 
the  dates  of  their  birth  and  death.  I  knew  that  book  by 
heart  from  cover  to  cover.  My  sister  Fanny  used  to  ex- 
amine me  in  it,  and  before  the  day  of  trial  I  was  master  of 
every  date. 

No  other  such  examination  has  ever  been  seen.  In  the 
great  ballroom  at  Willis's  Rooms  the  four  hundred  candi- 
dates sat  each  at  a  separate  desk. 

Inspectors  were  walking  round  to  see  that  there  was  no 
copying  and  that  no  books  were  used. 

In  the  music  gallery  stood  a  group  of  examiners,  and  if 
any  candidate  wanted  to  ask  a  question  he  had  to  stand  up 
and  call  out  his  number  and  an  inspector  would  take  his 
papers. 

It  was  a  great  relief  when  the  strain  was  over,  but  there 
was  a  month  of  anxiety  before  I  heard  that  I  had  been 
successful  and  had  taken  the  seventh  place  on  the  list.  The 
winners  were  allowed  to  take  up  extra  subjects,  and  I  was 
examined  and  got  certificates  in  English  History  and 
Political  Economy. 

When  I  went  to  the  Office  of  the  Civil  Service  Commis- 
sioners for  this  purpose  I  was  told  some  particulars  of  the 
examination.  It  had  cost  about  £900. 

The  limits  of  the  age  being  wide,  seventeen  to  twenty- 
five,  a  good  many  graduates  of  Oxford  and  Cambridge  and 


1855-8]  I  LEAVE  THE  SHOP  37 

London  had  come  forward,  and  there  were  a  dozen  or  so  of 
schoolmasters  among  the  candidates. 

In  the  English  Literature  paper  we  had  been  asked  to 
translate  Hamlet's  soliloquy  into  prose. 

An  examiner  told  me  that  more  than  a  dozen  of  the 
competitors  had  explained  the  phrase  "  When  he  himself 
might  his  quietus  make  with  a  bare  bodkin"  to  mean  that 
it  was  foolish  of  Hamlet  to  trouble  himself  so  much  when  he 
might  earn  a  decent  living  by  tailoring. 

Now  that  I  had  succeeded  in  so  hard  and  so  public  a 
competition  the  home  was  joyful  indeed. 

The  dear  father  was  not  quite  consoled.  It  was  not  un- 
important that  I  should  be  able  in  future  to  contribute  to 
the  cost  of  the  household,  but  after  having  me  with  him 
daily  for  four  years,  I  do  not  wonder  that  he  thought  the 
shop  would  be  dull  and  lonely ;  but  he  bore  up  bravely, 
and  my  days  as  a  silversmith  and  jeweller  were  over. 

A  party  was  given  to  celebrate  the  event.  Robert 
Pottle  and  his  sisters  were  there.  Tom  Howard  brought  his 
two  cousins,  and  my  father  and  mother  saw  Annie  Mitchell 
for  the  first  time. 


CHAPTER    V 

LITERATURE,   POLITICS,   AND  LAW  I     1850-1860 

THERE  is  a  part  of  my  life,  and  that  of  chief  importance, 
which  cannot  be  dealt  with  in  a  chronological  record  of 
events.  It  is  the  history  of  influences  rather  than  of  events, 
a  history  which  must  be  told  if  the  story  of  my  life  is  to  be 
complete,  and  which  would  be  frittered  away  if  I  tried  to 
interweave  it  with  the  narrative  which  is  found  in  other 
chapters  of  this  book.  I  speak  of  the  growth  of  those 
inclinations  and  tastes  for  literature  and  politics  and  law 
which  began  to  colour  my  thoughts  and  dictate  my  occupa- 
tions at  a  very  early  age,  and  which  were  gradually,  and 
during  the  course  of  some  years,  strengthening  their  hold 
upon  me  until  they  determined  the  course  and  objects  of 
my  life.  In  every  young  life  there  is  a  period  in  which  the 
mind  and  still  more  the  moral  character  is  in  its  most 
sensitive  and  receptive  condition  ;  when  books  and  friend- 
ships and  the  example  of  others  have  their  strongest  and 
most  abiding  influence ;  when  the  intellect  and  the  soul 
are  still  soft  enough  to  receive,  and  are  yet  firm  enough  to 
retain,  the  impressions  which  harden  into  habits  of  thought 
and  action.  That  period  varies  in  length  with  different 
natures  and  with  some  begins  very  early.  I  think  that 
with  me  it  was  from  the  age  of  ten  to  the  age  of  twenty, 
and  it  was  my  happy  fortune  that  these  ten  years  of  my  life 
coincided  with  one  of  the  most  notable  periods  in  the  literary 
history  of  this  country.  The  years  from  1850  to  1860 
were  the  golden  decade  of  modern  English  Literature. 
During  the  reigns  of  George  IV  and  William  IV  and  in  the 
early  years  of  Victoria  there  had  been  a  marked  falling  off 
in  our  imaginative  literature  both  in  poetry  and  prose. 

38 


T* 


850-60}  LYTTON   AND  DISRAELI  39 

Keats  died  in  1821,  Shelley  in  1822  ;  Byron  in  1824.  Sir 
Walter  Scott  lived  until  1832,  but  he  wrote  no  poetry  of 
importance  after  1815  ;  and  although  Wordsworth  did  not 
die  until  1850  the  same  may  be  said  of  him. 

During  the  twenty  years  which  followed  the  most  pro- 
minent names  in  poetry  were  those  of  Mrs.  Norton,  Thomas 
Hood,  and  Talfourd,  and  although  each  of  them  left  us  some 
fine  poetry,  neither  could  be  placed  in  the  first  rank. 

Again  in  fiction  there  had  been  no  great  production. 

Jane  Austen  died  in  1817  ;  and  Scott  wrote  nothing 
worthy  of  his  powers  after  Quentin  Durward  in  1823. 

There  had  indeed  in  the  interval  appeared  the  chief 
works  of  two  most  remarkable  men,  whose  literary  fame 
would  have  been  greater  if  their  lives  had  not  been  so  largely 
devoted  to  public  affairs.  They  were  Edward  Bulwer 
Lytton  and  Benjamin  Disraeli.  There  was  the  great  dis- 
tinction between  them  that  while  Bulwer  Lytton  was  a 
novelist  who  took  to  politics,  Disraeli  was  a  politician  who 
in  his  youth,  and  in  the  occasional  leisure  of  his  later  life, 
sketched  the  lighter  side  and  the  picturesque  aspects  of  the 
political  struggle. 

Bulwer  Lytton  did  not  take  seriously  to  politics  until  he 
was  nearly  fifty  years  old,  and  by  that  time  he  had  dis- 
tinguished himself  in  four  distinct  styles  of  fiction — the 
historic,  the  natural,  the  sentimental,  and  the  mystic. 
Rienzi,  1835,  The  Caxtons,  1848,  Ernest  Maltravers,  1837, 
and  Zanoni,  1842,  stand  at  the  head  of  the  different  groups. 
All  are  produced  by  an  artist  who  stands  aloof  from  all  the 
characters  he  creates,  and  studies  only  to  give  to  his  work 
artistic  completeness  and  finish. 

But  every  early  work  of  Disraeli  is  the  expression  of  a 
bright,  eager  soul  devoted  to  the  study  of  all  the  complex 
problems  of  political  society,  and  striving  to  set  forth  in  the 
scenes  and  studies  of  fiction  the  principles  which  were 
afterwards  applied  with  magnificent  results  to  the  conduct 
of  public  affairs.  And  considered  only  as  works  of  art  the 
great  trilogy  of  Coningsby,  Sybil,  and  Tancred  stand  very 
high  in  our  literature. 


40       LITERATURE,   POLITICS,   AND   LAW        [CHAP,  v 

To  me  they  were  very  early  a  delight  and  an  education  ; 
and  my  earliest  inclinations  for  political  work,  the  desire 
for  power  in  public  affairs  which  seized  me  early  and  has 
always  dominated  my  life,  only  to  meet  with  repeated  and 
final  disappointment,  was  gained  by  me  from  the  great 
teacher  who  has  been  the  constant  guide  of  my  public 
action,  and  the  only  political  leader  I  have  ever  known  to 
whom  I  would  at  any  time  have  submitted  myself  in  the 
firm  conviction  that  where  I  could  not  agree  with  him  in 
opinion  he  was  so  far  more  likely  to  be  right  that  obedience 
to  his  judgement  would  be  the  wisest  exercise  of  my  own. 

The  opening  of  the  second  half  of  the  nineteenth  century 
found  us  with  a  group  of  writers  who  were  nearing,  or  had 
but  lately  reached,  that  age  of  thirty-seven  which  marks 
the  attainment  of  the  highest  level  of  the  faculties  of  man. 
Alfred  Tennyson  was  41  ;  Mrs.  Gaskell  40  ;  Thackeray 
39  ;  Browning  and  Charles  Dickens  38 ;  Charles  Reade 
36 ;  Anthony  Trollope  35  ;  Charlotte  Bronte  34 ;  Froude 
32  ;  George  Eliot,  Charles  Kingsley,  and  John  Ruskin  31. 

Carlyle,  Macaulay,  Bulwer  Lytton,  Disraeli,  and  Mrs. 
Browning  were  seniors ;  Matthew  Arnold,  Coventry  Pat- 
more,  Wilkie  Collins  and  George  Meredith  had  just  reached 
manhood  ;  Robert  Lytton  was  a  youth  of  eighteen. 

These  were  the  writers  by  whose  works  my  boyhood  was 
trained  and  inspired  ;  and  during  the  ten  years  when  I  was 
most  receptive  there  poured  forth  from  the  Press  a  series  of 
works,  almost  every  one  of  which  I  remember  to  have  read 
soon  after  its  publication. 

It  is  well  to  give  a  list,  for  there  has  been  no  other  such 
period  in  all  the  long  history  of  our  literature. 

1850.  Pendennis,  In  Memoriam,  Christmas  Eve  and  Easter 

Day,  Alton  Locke. 

1851.  Life  of  Sterling,  Stones  of  Venice,  Yeast. 

1852.  Esmond,  Peg  Woffington,  Ode  to  Duke  of  Wellington. 

1853.  Hypatia,  Bleak   House,  Ruth,  My   Novel,   Tamer  ton 

Church  Tower. 

1854.  The  New  comes,  Hard  Times,  The  Angel  in  the  House. 


1850-60]  THE   INFLUENCE    OF   BOOKS  41 

1855.  Maud,  Men   and   Women,    Westward  Ho,   The  Vir- 

ginians, Macaulay's  History,  Vols.  Ill  &  IV,  The 
Warden,  Clytemnestra. 

1856.  Fronde's  History,  Vols.  I  &  II,  Scenes  of  Clerical  Life, 

Little  Dorrit. 

1857.  Two  Years  Ago,  Aurora  Leigh,  The  Dead  Secret. 

1858.  Andromeda,  What  will  he  do  with  it,  Froude's  History, 

Vols.  Ill  &  IV. 

1859.  Idylls  of  the  King,  Adam  Bede,  Tale  of  Two  Cities, 

The  Ordeal  of  Richard  Feverel. 

Of  these  thirty-seven  works  it  is  not  too  much  to  say  that 
at  least  twenty  have  taken  their  places  among  the  master- 
pieces of  our  literature,  and  that  during  the  half-century 
which  has  tested  and  confirmed  their  claim  no  one  of  these 
twenty  has  in  its  own  class  been  excelled.  It  was  good  to  be 
living  in  those  days.  How  well  I  remember  the  excitement 
month  by  month  of  seeing  the  green-covered  parts  in  which 
the  works  of  Dickens  appeared,  and  the  yellow  covers  which 
Thackeray  had  adopted  for  his ;  and  the  tumult  in  Pater- 
noster Row  when  Longman  gave  out  to  the  trade  the  two 
volumes  of  Macaulay's  History.  Those  happy  years  when 
my  young  intellect  had  not  been  harnessed  and  bound  to 
a  political  party  or  a  professional  calling,  when  the  novel 
and  the  poem  and  the  history  were  like  the  varied  flowers 
of  a  great  garden  in  which  it  was  my  privilege  to  walk,  were 
years  of  intense  enjoyment.  The  joy  of  breathing  such  an 
atmosphere,  of  living  with  such  friends,  who  year  by  year 
were  filling  my  young  mind  with  incidents  having  as  essential 
truth  in  the  histories  we  call  fiction,  as  in  the  fiction  we 
call  history,  and  with  noble  thoughts,  whose  beauty  of 
literary  form  kept  them  in  the  mind,  so  that  memory  was 
always  sounding  the  strong,  pure  note  to  which  all  one's 
thoughts  and  hopes  and  aspirations  became  as  by  nature 
attuned. 

There  has  been  much  in  my  life  that  has  been  poor  and 
trivial,  and  little  worthy  of  one  to  whom  this  treasure  and 
delight  was  given,  but  it  would  have  been  weaker  and  poorer 


42        LITERATURE,    POLITICS,    AND    LAW        {CHAP,  v 

by  far  if  I  had  not  in  those  days  of  receptive  boyhood  had 
.  round  me  the  influences  of  this  noble  literature. 

It  gave  me,  of  course,  the  desire  to  be  myself  an  author. 
During  the  second  year  of  my  stay  at  the  Edmonton 
Boarding-school,  I  arranged  with  another  young  boy  that 
we  would  issue  a  monthly  magazine,  which  I  was  to  write  and 
he  to  illustrate,  to  circulate  in  the  school  among  subscribers 
who  were,  I  think,  to  pay  their  subscriptions  in  steel  pens. 
Before  I  was  fifteen  I  had  written  a  play  in  five  acts  called 
The  Serf  (not,  I  need  hardly  say,  the  play  of  that  name  which 
was  afterwards  produced  at  the  Olympic  and  acted  by  Kate 
Terry  and  Henry  Neville)  and  sent  it  to  my  good  friend 
William  Creswick,  one  of  the  lessees  of  the  Surrey  Theatre. 
He  returned  it  as  unsuitable,  and  I  destroyed  the  manuscript, 
and  never  again  attempted  the  drama.  Then  later  came 
the  Journal  of  the  Evening  Classes  of  which  I  speak  else- 
where, and  my  association  with  The  Morning  Herald  and 
Standard  and  with  Henry  Morley  and  The  Examiner.  In- 
deed while  I  was  a  student  at  Lincoln's  Inn  some  of  my 
friends  advised  me  to  turn  to  literature  as  a  calling,  and  not 
risk  the  doubtful  and  heavy  labours  of  the  Bar. 

I  remember  a  little  consultation  at  J.  M.  Ludlow's 
chambers  at  3,  Old  Square,  where  Vernon  and  Godfrey 
Lushington,  and,  I  think,  Tom  Hughes,  were  present  and 
F.  J.  Furnivall  tried  to  persuade  me  to  take  up  the  pro- 
fession of  letters,  and  told  me  how  he  had  been  at  the  Bar 
over  ten  years  and  had  never  made  enough  to  pay  the 
laundress  for  keeping  his  chambers  tidy.  Had  I  taken  his 
advice  I  should  probably  have  been  better  able  to  write 
a  life,  but  there  would  have  been  no  life  of  my  own  worth 
writing.  The  first  definite  impression  made  upon  me  by 
literature  which  had  reference  to  the  future  work  of  my 
life  was  political.  Coningsby  and  Sybil  together  made  me 
a  politician.  Coningsby  set  me  among  the  great  actors  on 
the  political  stage  ;  and  gave  me  hope  that  there  I  might 
some  day  play  my  part.  Sybil,  dealing  as  it  does  with  the 
noblest  principles  and  loftiest  aims  of  political  action, 
purified  that  hope  from  the  mere  desire  for  personal  success 


1850-60]  MY   FIRST   PURCHASE  .43 

and  display  and  reward,  and  filled  me  with  a  worthier 
ambition.  The  key-note  of  Sybil  is  to  be  found  in  the 
sentences  which  close  the  fourteenth  chapter,  where  the 
writer  declared  that  the  Tory  party  in  a  parliamentary 
sense  was  dead  (and  this  was  true  in  1845  as  it  was  true  in 
1906),  but  that  it  "  still  lived  in  the  thought  and  sentiment 
and  consecrated  memory  of  the  English  nation/1  and  fore- 
told that  it  "  would  yet  rise  from  the  tomb  to  bring  back 
strength  to  the  Crown,  liberty  to  the  subject  and  to  announce 
that  Power  has  only  one  duty,  to  secure  the  social  welfare  of 
the  People/' 

The  last  words  I  spoke  in  the  House  of  Commons  may 
stand  as  proof  that  the  teachings  of  my  great  master  were 
not  forgotten  or  obscured  in  fifty  years  of  strenuous  life. 

I  hope  that  the  Tory  party  will  regain  its  influence,  for 
I  believe  its  principles  are  an  important  and  even  essential 
part  of  our  national  life.  And  I  trust  our  leaders  will 
recognise  that  when  we  are  anxious  to  extend  the  area  of 
our  trade  and  gain  for  ourselves  Imperial  renown,  we  must 
never  forget  that  the  first  duty  of  a  statesman  is  to  the 
poorest  of  the  people,  and  that  to  every  statesman  worthy 
of  the  name  the  welfare  of  the  people  is  the  highest  law.1 

I  have  no  doubt  that  it  was  Coningsby  which  prompted 
my  choice  of  the  first  book  I  ever  bought  with  my  own 
money.  That  was  Brougham's  Lives  of  the  Statesmen  of 
the  Reign  of  George  III.  I  well  remember  having  a  present 
of  five  shillings  given  me,  and  going  off  to  a  bookseller's 
shop  in  Holborn  to  give  45.  6d.  for  three  little  volumes, 
still  in  my  possession,  which  contain  the  best  literary  work 
which  that  strange  genius  ever  produced. 

I  had  only  left  school  six  months  when  I  went  to  my  first 
political  meeting.  The  scandalous  mismanagement  by  the 
War  Office  in  the  early  stages  of  the  Crimean  War  called 
into  existence  the  Administrative  Reform  Association,  which 
soon  became  very  powerful. 

A  meeting  was  announced  to  be  held  at  Drury  Lane 

i  March  i2th,  1906,  Hansard,  4th  Series,  153,  1048.     Selected  Speeches,  16 


44        LITERATURE,   POLITICS,   AND   LAW        [CHAP,  v 

Theatre  on  June  23rd,  1855,  at  which  Charles  Dickens  would 
speak.  I  went  to  the  office  of  the  Association,  where  the 
Post  Office  now  is  in  King  William  Street,  to  ask  for  a  ticket. 
I  was  thin  and  small  for  my  age,  and  the  secretary  called 
some  of  the  Committee  from  their  room,  and  they  looked 
with  amused  curiosity  at  their  youngest  recruit. 

But  I  got  my  ticket,  and  struggled  in  the  crowd  up  the 
gallery  stairs,  and  saw  a  meeting  which  I  think  I  have  never 
seen  equalled  for  intense  and  angry  enthusiasm.  Dickens 
had  never  before  spoken  on  a  political  platform,  and  had 
an  extraordinary  reception  and  an  extraordinary  success. 

An  attractive  presence,  a  melodious  and  penetrating 
voice,  gestures  restrained  but  effective,  gave  force  to  a 
speech  elaborately  prepared  and  full  of  brilliant  phrases. 
Palmers  ton  was  the  "  comic  old  gentleman."  Speaking  of 
the  attacks  made  by  the  soldiers  in  the  House  of  Commons 
upon  Austen  Henry  Layard — "  Assyrian  Layard  "  as  he 
was  called — he  said  that  "  whereas  in  Spain  the  bull  rushes 
at  the  scarlet,  in  England  the  scarlet  rushes  at  the  bull." 
I  quote  the  closing  passage — "Gentlemen,  centuries  ago, 
before  arithmetic  was  invented,  our  national  accounts  were 
kept  by  cutting  notches  upon  bits  of  wood  called  Exchequer 
tallies.  The  years  passed  by.  Cocker  was  born  and  died  ; 
Walkinghame  was  born  and  died ;  and  at  last  some 
adventurous  genius  suggested  that  it  would  be  as  well  to 
keep  our  accounts  with  pen  and  paper.  After  much  re- 
sistance and  much  gloomy  foreboding  of  evil  the  change 
was  made.  But  what  was  to  be  done  with  the  tallies.  It 
would  be  contrary  to  the  traditions  of  the  public  service 
to  put  them  to  any  useful  purpose,  so  they  were  packed 
away  under  the  Houses  of  Parliament.  Presently  a  flue 
was  overheated,  there  was  plenty  of  wood  in  the  Exchequer 
tallies  to  carry  on  the  fire,  and  the  Houses  of  Parliament 
were  burned  down.  The  national  architect  was  called  in, 
and  a  new  palace  was  built.  We  are  now  in  the  second 
million  of  its  cost,  the  national  pig  has  not  yet  got  over 
the  stile,  and  the  little  old  woman  Britannia  will  not 
go  home  to-night." 


1850-60]  EARLY   DREAMS  45 

It  was  on  April  29th,  1856,  that  I  first  saw  the  House  of 
Commons.  I  dare  say  Mr.  John  Masterman,  whose  bank 
was  in  Nicholas  Lane  and  who  was  a  customer  and  friend 
of  my  father,  gave  me  an  order,  and  I  heard  a  debate  upon 
the  siege  of  Kars,  in  which  Layard  and  Sir  Seymour  Fitz- 
gerald took  part. 

Next  year  there  was  a  far  more  interesting  and  important 
incident,  for  on  March  igth,  1857,  I  £°t  m^°  a  crowded  room 
at  the  London  Tavern,  Bishopsgate  Street,  where  Lord  John 
Russell  was  addressing  an  election  meeting. 

Mr.  Raikes  Currie  had  been  brought  from  Northampton 
by  the  Liberals  who  wished  to  oust  Lord  John  from  the 
representation  of  the  City  because  he  had  joined  the  coalition 
of  Conservatives  and  Manchester  Radicals,  who  had  carried 
a  vote  of  censure  upon  the  Palmerston  government  for 
going  to  war  with  China 

It  was  at  this  meeting  that  Lord  John  Russell  described 
his  opponent  as  "  a  young  man  from  the  country/'  a  phrase 
which  was  used  as  a  line  of  a  popular  comic  song,  and  was 
a  catchword  for  many  years.  I  stood  at  the  door  to  see 
Lord  John  come  out,  and  was  rejoiced  to  find  that  he  was 
but  little  taller  than  myself.  There  had  indeed  been  some 
slight  disturbance  at  the  meeting,  for  the  assembled  electors 
wanted  to  see  their  candidate  as  well  as  to  hear  him,  and 
were  not  satisfied  until  his  little  lordship  was  persuaded  to 
stand  on  a  chair  and  so  remedy  his  deficiency  in  height. 
In  the  street  the  ballad  sellers  were  singing  and  selling  a 
doggerel  ballad  the  chorus  of  which  ran  something  like  this : 

They  know  me  at  Tavistock,  Bandon  and  Thetford, 
They  know  me  at  Stroud,  and  South  Devon  and  Retford ; 
I'm  the  dear  little  son  of  the  old  Duke  of  Bedford, 
I'm  little  finality  John. 

I  have  very  little  doubt  that  as  I  went  back  to  the  shop 
I  had  already  in  my  mind  the  thought  that  I  might  some 
day  be  myself  member  for  the  City  of  London.  The  hope 
never  left  me  ;  and  it  was  splendidly  fulfilled  forty-nine 
years  later  when  16,019  citizens  (57  per  cent,  of  the  whole 
number  of  the  electors)  voted-  for  me  and  gave  me  the 


46        LITERATURE,    POLITICS,   AND    LAW         [CHAP,  v 

highest  honour  of  my  whole  life,  by  making  me  the  senior 
member  for  the  greatest  city  in  the  world,  by  the  largest 
vote  which  had  ever  been  given  to  a  candidate  in  that  con- 
stituency. 

At  that  time,  to  any  one  but  myself  the  dream  would  have 
seemed  absurd.  But  to  me  the  only  real  question  was  how 
I  should  begin  the  journey,  and  the  names  of  Brougham 
and  Lyndhurst  suggested  the  way.  It  was  not  money  I  was 
thinking  of  then  or  at  any  time.  I  had  no  idea  of  the 
enormous  rewards  which,  as  I  now  know,  are  given  to  the 
successful  advocate  ;  but  my  ambition  looked  to  a  career 
of  public  life,  the  membership  of  one  of  the  legislative 
chambers,  and  the  sharing  in  the  councils  of  a  great  political 
party. 

Nor  did  I  then  realise  how  delightful,  how  full  of  intel- 
lectual interest,  how  rich  in  the  pleasantest  of  surroundings 
and  companionship,  the  profession  of  the  law  in  its  more 
favoured  branch  would  be. 

All  I  knew  was  that  the  Bar  was  the  only  road  by  which  I 
could  hope  to  make  my  way  into  political  life  at  an  age 
when  my  ideals  and  energies  would  still  be  fresh. 

The  way  looked  difficult,  but  that  was  a  reason  for  be- 
ginning at  once.  In  another  chapter  I  tell  the  story  of  ,my 
studies  and  examinations,  but  there  are  a  few  other  parts 
of  my  preparation  of  which  I  must  speak  here.  Public 
speaking,  not  merely  the  preparation  of  speeches,  but  the 
habit  of  speaking  in  large  rooms,  and  to  audiences  of  different 
characters,  was  obviously  essential.  So  in  the  year  1858  I 
offered  to  deliver  one  of  a  series  of  Thursday  evening  lectures 
at  Crosby  Hall.  I  lectured  on  Joan  of  Arc,  and  spoke  for 
more  than  an  hour  without  using  any  notes.  It  seems  to 
me  now  that  it  was  rather  a  daring  attempt  for  a  boy  of 
seventeen,  but  on  the  whole  it  was  successful. 

There  were  two  criticisms  upon  it.  My  dear  mother  was, 
I  think,  rather  proud  of  the  feat,  but  she  complained  of  a 
constant  hesitation  of  speech  which  made  her  nervous  from 
sentence  to  sentence  lest  I  should  break  down.  The  other 
criticism  came  from  a  fellow  student  who  was  a  great 


: 


1850-60]          THE   TANCRED    STUDENTSHIPS  47 

musician,  one  D.  C.  Stevens,  who  soon  afterwards  went  to 
South  Africa  and  became  one  of  the  Pioneers  of  the  Rand. 
He  told  me  my  voice  was  harsh  and  unmusical,  and  advised 
me  to  take  to  singing.  I  followed  his  advice,  and  for  some 
years  was  a  constant  attendant  at  a  choral  society.  I  have 
no  doubt  I  gained  much  advantage  thereby.  It  is  only  by 
singing  that  one  learns  to  use  easily  different  tones  in 
speaking,  and  so  avoids  the  painful  monotony  which  in 
Court  or  Church  so  often  encourages  sleep. 

The  hesitation  could  only  be  cured  by  practice,  so  for 
several  years  I  sought  opportunities  of  delivering  lectures 
in  all  sorts  of  places  and  on  very  different  subjects.  Mary 
Queen  of  Scots  ;  Sir  Walter  Scott ;  Independence  ;  Dean 
Swift  and  Lord  Bolingbroke  were,  with  Joan  of  Arc  and 
Richard  Neville,  the  Last  of  the  Barons,  my  favourite 
subjects,  and  a  steady  persistence  in  this  practice  quite 
cured  my  nervous  hesitation. 

My  hopes  of  some  day  getting  to  the  Bar  were  much 
strengthened  by  the  accidental  discovery  that  some  student- 
ships existed  which  seemed  exactly  adapted  to  meet  my  case. 

On  the  steep  slope  of  Holborn  which  ran  down  to  the 
bottom  of  Snow  Hill,  where  now  the  Holborn  Viaduct 
crosses  the  valley,  there  used  to  be  some  second-hand  book 
shops,  with  open  trays,  and,  loitering  at  one  of  these,  I  picked 
up  a  volume  containing  the  history  of  Lincoln's  Inn  by  one 
Spilsbury,  the  librarian  of  the  Society.  Turning  over  the 
leaves  I  came  upon  a  statement  that  one  Christopher 
Tancred  of  Whixley  Hall,  Yorkshire,  had  bequeathed  large 
funds  for  the  founding  of  twelve  studentships,  four  in 
Divinity,  four  in  Physic,  and  four  in  Law. 

He  had  been  a  bencher  of  Lincoln's  Inn,  and  his  will  pre- 
scribed that  the  students  in  law  should  be  between  eighteen 
and  twenty-three  years  of  age,  unmarried  and  members  of 
the  Church  of  England,  and  that  they  should  declare  that 
they  intended  to  practise  in  the  Common  Law  Courts  but 
were  unable  without  help  of  this  nature  to  obtain  the  needful 
education.  This  seemed  the  very  thing  for  me,  and  I  went 
back  to  my  studies  in  high  spirits,  feeling  quite  sure  that 


48        LITERATURE,    POLITICS,    AND    LAW         [CHAP,  v 

when  the  time  came  I  should  have  the  assistance  of  Chris- 
topher Tancred  in  making  my  difficult  way  to  the  Bar. 

This  chapter,  in  which  I  have  dwelt  upon  the  influences 
which  during  the  years  from  1850  to  1860  were  moulding 
my  character  and  determining  my  career,  may  fitly  close 
with  a  description  of  an  incident  which  set,  as  it  were,  a 
seal  on  both. 

In  1860  Lord  Lyndhurst  still  lived,  the  Nestor  of  politics, 
and  I  heard  one  day  that  he  was  expected  to  speak  in  the 
House  of  Lords.  So  I  wrote  to  Lord  Derby  to  ask  for 
admission  to  the  debate,  and  there  came  back  a  letter 
franked  by  him  and  containing  an  order,  and  on  May  2ist 
I  was  early  in  the  Gallery  of  the  House.  On  the  back  of  the 
front  bench  on  the  right  of  the  Woolsack  a  rail  had  been 
built,  and  presently  Lord  Lyndhurst,  received  with  every 
mark  of  affectionate  respect,  came  to  his  place.  I  remember 
little  of  the  debate,  but  no  one  could  forget  the  scene  while 
he  was  speaking.  He  had  reached  eighty-eight  years  of  age 
that  day  ;  he  could  not  stand  unaided,  so  the  rail  had  been 
built  for  him,  and  folding  his  arms  across  his  chest  he  hung 
upon  it  while  he  spoke.  But  the  voice  was  full  and  resonant, 
the  argument  was  closely  reasoned,  and  the  perfectly  turned 
sentences  were  rhythmical  and  pointed.  Soon  after  the 
speech  was  finished  he  left  the  House,  and  the  scene  was  a 
curious  one.  In  Kenelm  Chillingly  Lord  Lytton  advises 
a  young  man  to  take  at  an  early  age  to  a  thirty-five  years'  old 
wig,  because  he  will  be  able  to  wear  that  at  any  age.  Lynd- 
hurst had  done  that,  and  the  worn  and  deep-lined  face 
looked  out  from  under  brown  curling  locks,  and  he  left 
the  chamber  hanging  on  the  arm  of  Lord  Ellenborough,  the 
great  Governor-General  of  India,  whose  lion-like  head 
with  its  splendid  sweep  of  snow-white  hair  made  a  strange 
contrast. 

The  Peers  rose  from  their  seats  and  cheered  with  unwonted 
vehemence  as  he  passed  among  them,  and  I  saw  to  what  a 
height  of  public  dignity  and  regard  it  was  possible  for  a 
barrister  to  rise  without  the  help  of  ancestral  renown  or 
family  influence. 


I 


CHAPTER    VI 

THE   INDIA   HOUSE  I     1859-1860 

IT  was  in  February  1859,  Just  after  my  eighteenth  birthday, 
that  I  entered  on  my  duties  at  the  old  East  India  House 
in  Leadenhall  Street  which  was  associated  with  so  much  of 
the  history  and  growth  of  our  Indian  Empire ;  the  house 
from  which  Clive  had  set  forth  in  1743  ;  the  house  to  which 
Warren  Hastings  had  returned  in  1785  from  his  great  pro- 
consulship,  when  he  was  the  hero  of  the  day,  and  had  not 
yet  been  made  the  object  of  a  political  attack.  In  the 
examination  I  had  done  particularly  well  in  arithmetic,  and 
I  had  taken  certain  extra  certificates,  so  I  was  given  my 
choice  of  the  department  in  which  I  would  serve ;  and  I 
chose  the  Accountants'  branch.  This  was  housed  on  the 
first  floor  of  the  building,  and  I  was  placed  at  a  pleasant 
desk  close  to  a  large  window  overlooking  the  central  court- 
yard of  the  house.  Quite  close  to  me  was  the  desk  which 
had  been  occupied  thirty-five  years  before  by  Charles  Lamb, 
about  whose  kindly  and  genial  nature  and  shockingly  un- 
businesslike habits  my  colleagues  who  had  known  him  had 
many  a  story  to  tell.  The  porters  used  to  make  many  half- 
crowns  by  showing  to  American  visitors  a  chair  which  they 
declared,  quite  untruly,  to  have  been  that  which  he  sat  in, 
and  by  selling  the  very  last  quill  pen  which  had  been  pre- 
served of  those  which  he  had  used. 

My  work  was  easy,  but  quite  mechanical  and  monotonous. 
It  consisted  for  the  most  part  in  copying  draft  minutes  and 
letters  and  in  copying  into  a  large  ledger  the  pay  warrants 
which  had  been  drawn  up  in  another  part  of  the  office. 

The  entry  to  be  made  was  like  this  : 

Name.  Pay.          Widows'  Fund.     Orphan  Allowance.  Amount. 

Smith,   Lt.-Col.   R.  150  7.10  3.15  *38«i5 

49 


5o  THE   INDIA   HOUSE  [CHAP.  VI 

Forty-two  of  these  entries  went  upon  the  page,  and  then 
the  leaf  was  turned  over  and  forty- two  more  were  begun. 

It  seemed  almost  a  humiliation,  after  working  for  months 
and  passing  a  great  examination  which  was  to  mark  the 
opening  of  the  Civil  Service  to  men  of  exceptional  ability, 
to  be  set  down  to  a  task  which  any  fairly  taught  lad  of 
fifteen  could  have  done  as  well  as  I,  but  my  new  position 
had  a  compensation  which  made  me  quite  content. 

I  soon  found  out  not  only  that  in  the  ordinary  hours 
of  work,  ten  o'clock  to  four,  I  could  earn  an  income  of  at 
least  £150  a  year,  but  that  there  was  no  objection  to  my 
working  overtime  and  so  making  a  very  large  addition  to 
this  amount.  My  immediate  superior  was  a  Mr.  Charles 
Davis,  an  excellent  clerk,  but  a  rather  rough  and  not  very 
good-tempered  man,  whom  I  mention  here  only  for  the  sake 
of  quoting  a  thing  which  he  once  said  to  me  and  which  I 
have  always  usefully  remembered.  I  have  an  impression 
that  he  told  me  that  the  great  Duke  of  Wellington  was  the 
author.  I  had  made  some  excuse  for  a  fault  of  which  he 
complained,  and  he  said,  "  A  man  who  is  good  at  excuses  is 
never  good  at  anything  else." 

The  head  of  the  room,  a  very  kind  old  gentleman  named 
Waghorn,  who  had  been  retired  from  the  East  India  Com- 
pany's service  in  1834  an(i  "then  reappointed,  and  since  that 
date  had  enjoyed  a  substantial  pension  and  a  substantial 
salary,  was  much  annoyed  when  he  happened  to  hear  that 
I  was  attending  classes  in  the  evening,  and  gave  me  a  solemn 
lecture  on  the  duty  of  giving  all  my  energies  to  the  Govern- 
ment which  employed  me  and  so  on  ;  but  he  soon  became 
my  very  good  friend,  and  encouraged  me  to  do  as  much  as 
I  could  of  the  extra  work,  for  which  he  had  to  initial  my 
book. 

I  used  to  go  to  the  office  at  nine  and  stay  until  five  or 
half-past  five,  and  the  overtime  pay  which  I  was  able  to 
earn  during  these  hours  came  to  no  less  than  £100  in  a  year. 
I  had  good  reason  to  be  content.  At  this  rate  I  could  help 
my  parents  with  a  substantial  payment  for  living  at  home, 
and  three  or  four  years  would  be  sufficient  to  set  aside  the 


1859-60]  KING'S   COLLEGE  51 

money  I  wanted  for  my  education  for  the  Bar.  And  I  was 
young  enough  to  make  the  delay  of  three  or  four  years  seem 
quite  unimportant.  I  knew  I  needed  at  least  that  time 
to  equip  myself  with  knowledge  which  I  had  so  far  had  no 
opportunity  of  acquiring.  I  was  thinking  especially  of  the 
classical  languages. 

I  carried  in  my  mind  the  firm  resolve  to  become  a  Tancred 
student,  and  I  knew  that  the  Latin  language  and  certain 
Latin  authors  were  the  chief  subjects  of  that  examination. 
So  I  determined  to  give  myself  to  these  studies ;  and  leaving 
the  classes  at  Crosby  Hall,  which  were  of  a  commercial 
character,  I  became  a  matriculated  student  at  the  evening 
classes  lately  opened  at  King's  College  in  the  Strand.  A 
matriculated  student  had  to  attend  four  classes  besides  the 
divinity  lectures,  so  I  chose  two  easy  subjects,  English 
Literature,  taught  by  Henry  Morley,  and  English  History, 
taught  by  Henry  Wace  (now  Dean  of  Canterbury),  and  the 
classes  in  Greek  and  Latin  to  which  I  meant  to  give  almost 
all  my  work.  The  Greek  I  gave  up  at  the  end  of  a  single 
term.  It  was  not  difficult,  and  of  course  I  soon  mastered 
the  simpler  parts  of  the  grammar,  but  I  was  quite  satisfied 
that  it  would  be  of  no  practical  use  to  me,  and  I  have  never 
seen  reason  to  regret  having  given  it  up.  Latin,  of  course, 
I  was  obliged  to  learn,  so  I  continued  the  study  with  a 
diligence  which  if  it  had  been  kept  up  for  the  three  or  four 
years  for  which  I  was  planning  would,  I  dare  say,  have 
given  me  a  fair  knowledge  of  the  language  and  might,  indeed, 
have  enabled  me  to  do  what  most  of  our  university  graduates 
cannot  do — that  is,  read  it  with  sufficient  ease  to  enjoy 
the  literary  beauties  of  the  classic  authors. 

Before  I  pass  away  from  the  subject  of  King's  College  I 
must  mention  a  friendship  made  there  which  was  of  great 
value  to  me.  Henry  Morley,  the  lecturer  on  English  Litera- 
ture, was  one  of  the  most  delightful  and  one  of  the  noblest 
souled  men  who  ever  lived. 

Of  his  works  I  need  not  speak.  His  history  of  English 
literature  is  by  far  the  best  book  of  its  kind  in  our  language. 
He  was  among  the  first  to  procure  the  issue  of  the  best 


52  THE   INDIA   HOUSE  [CHAP,  vi 

books  at  prices  so  low  that  nearly  half  a  century  of  improve- 
ment and  competition  has  not  reduced  them.  A  man  of 
fine  presence,  fair  haired  and  fresh  complexioned ;  strong, 
alert,  cheerful;  his  blue-grey  eyes  lighting  with  love  and 
humour,  or  flashing  with  anger  at  any  story  of  meanness  or 
of  fraud ;  brave  as  a  lion,  gentle  as  a  woman,  he  fought  hard 
for  truth  and  justice,  careless  of  toil  or  obloquy,  or  of  the 
sordid  considerations  which  so  often  cramp  the  energies  and 
corrupt  the  souls  of  some  of  the  best  among  us.  He  was  one 
whose  friendship  was  so  delightful  a  privilege  that  I  have 
been  thankful  all  my  life  for  having  been  brought  under  his 
influence.  If  in  my  own  life  there  have  been  times  when 
voices  of  self-interest  have  tempted  me  to  be  unfaithful 
to  the  truth  as  I  saw  it,  the  inspiration  of  the  teaching  and 
example  of  Henry  Morley  have,  I  trust  and  believe,  helped 
me  to  keep  to  the  path  of  duty.  He  gave  me  his  kindest 
friendship.  I  used  (often  with  John  George  Watts,  another 
of  his  pupils  at  King's  College,  who  lived  at  Brunswick 
Square,  Camberwell,  and  was  a  fish  salesman  at  Billingsgate 
Market,  a  man  of  fine  literary  taste  and  himself  a  writer 
of  some  pleasant  poetry)  to  go  and  spend  a  Sunday  evening 
now  and  then  with  him  at  Upper  Park  Road,  Hampstead, 
and  there  saw  the  vision  of  perfect  domestic  happiness,  and 
enjoyed  a  companionship  which  could  not  fail  to  elevate 
and  teach. 

I  think  that  Henry  Morley 's  interest  in  me  was  increased 
by  the  fact  of  my  having  become  at  the  age  of  seventeen 
the  editor  of  a  regular  monthly  magazine. 

The  Journal  of  the  Evening  Classes  for  Young  Men  made 
its  appearance  in  January  1859,  an^  was  published  by  W. 
H.  Collingridge,  the  founder  of  the  "  City  Press."  It  was  a 
sixteen-page  magazine,  and  one  half  of  its  space  was  to  be 
filled  by  contributions  from  the  members  of  the  classes,  who 
elected  two  editors  to  conduct  the  work.  My  colleague, 
F.  W.  Reynolds,  did  absolutely  nothing  except  sign  the 
address  by  which  we  introduced  ourselves  to  our  readers 
and  that  in  which  twelve  months  later  we  said  our  words  of 
farewell.  For  the  venture  was  not  a  success. 


1859-60]       THE   EVENING   CLASSES   JOURNAL          53 
I  quote  from  the  December  number  : 

Over  and  over  again  the  time  for  sending  copy  to  the 
printer  has  come,  and  no  essays  have  been  received.  We 
have  been  compelled  often,  amid  the  pressure  of  other 
engagements,  to  write  matter  for  the  space ;  and  it  has 
only  been  by  the  constant  courtesy  of  the  publisher  that  the 
journal  has  appeared  at  its  proper  time. 

Thus,  from  necessity,  and  not  by  any  means  from  choice, 
more  than  half  of  the  literary  matter  has  been  written  by 
one  hand.  "  Tom  Brown,"  "  George  Guy,"  "  E.  D.  Ward," 
and  "  E.  G.  C."  are  but  different  signatures  of  the  same 
writer ;  and  it  must  be  remembered,  in  excuse  for  many 
shortcomings,  that  these  essays  were  many  of  them  written 
under  the  most  unfavourable  circumstances,  and  in  so  much 
haste  that  we  were  often  obliged  to  send  them  to  the  printer 
without  a  single  reperusal. 

The  contributions  thus  referred  to  were  of  a  varied 
character.  A  life  of  Burke  ;  a  biography  in  five  chapters 
of  Charlotte  Bronte  ;  two  essays  upon  modern  English 
poetry  ;  an  article  on  "  Matters  and  Men  "  ;  two  sketches 
descriptive  of  my  walks  from  Eastbourne  to  Hastings  and 
from  Hastings  to  Rye ;  two  obituary  notices  of  Henry 
Hallam  and  W.  K.  Prescott,  and  two  short  specimens  of 
very  feeble  verse,  were  my  contributions  during  the  year. 
I  am  puzzled  now  to  understand  how  I  could  find  time  for 
all  this  work.  For  my  classes  at  King's  College  and  my 
editorial  labours  did  not  represent  all  my  occupations  of 
this  kind.  I  was  diligently  attending  the  debating  society 
at  Crosby  Hall,  where  I  was  the  accepted  leader  of  the  Con- 
servative party,  a  young  solicitor's  clerk,  one  W.  R.  Stevens, 
who  was  really  a  brilliant  speaker,  being  the  leader  of  the 
Liberals. 

And  I  delivered  a  few  lectures.  In  the  autumn  I  de- 
livered a  lecture  at  Crosby  Hall  on  "  The  Last  of  the  Barons," 
which  cost  me  a  good  deal  of  labour. 

And  although  it  is  but  a  trifle  I  should  like  to  add  that 
in  September  an  elocutionary  entertainment  was  given  at 
Crosby  Hall  by  three  members  of  the  classes.  One  was 
5 


54  THE   INDIA   HOUSE  [CHAP,  vi 

John  Millard,  a  teacher  of  elocution,  whose  daughter 
Evelyn  has  since  become  a  brilliant  and  successful  actress  ; 
one  was  William  Barlow,  a  friend  and  companion  of  J.  L. 
Toole  at  the  Walworth  Institution  ;  and  I  was  the  third. 

It  seems  a  good  deal  to  have  been  done  by  a  lad  of  eighteen, 
who  had  to  spend  three  evenings  a  week  at  King's  College, 
and  who  was  at  the  time  busily  engaged  in  the  pleasant  art 
of  love-making. 

For  I  was  paying  diligent  court  to  Annie  Mitchell.  Once 
a  week  I  would  leave  the  India  Office  early,  take  Tilling' s 
omnibus  which  went  to  Peckham  by  way  of  the  Peckham 
Park  Road,  and  generally  take  some  flowers  to  the  dear 
girl  who  would  usually  be  sitting  at  work  at  the  window. 
These  evenings  with  poetry  and  music  and  song,  and  to 
me  the  delight  of  a  first  love,  brightened  all  the  week. 

But  how  was  I  to  make  myself  secure  that  they  would 
continue.  The  disparity  of  age  which  afterwards  seemed 
wholly  to  disappear  was  then  a  real  and  very  obvious 
barrier  ;  it  seemed  absurd  for  me,  a  boy  of  eighteen,  to  ask 
a  young  woman  of  twenty-one  to  pledge  herself  to  share 
a  future  which  my  own  obstinate  ambition  rendered  as 
uncertain  as  any  future  could  be.  But  not  to  speak  was 
almost  to  invite  another  to  speak,  perhaps  to  win,  that  for 
which  I  longed  ;  so  I  ventured  all  and  asked  her  to  promise 
to  be  my  wife.  In  November  1859  we  were  engaged. 

That  engagement  did  not  last  long.  When  I  took  the 
news  home  my  father  laughed,  and  I  think  my  mother  cried. 
It  seemed  to  them  a  folly  ;  and  unkind  things  were  unwisely 
said,  and  not  easily  forgotten. 

My  dear  girl  was,  I  am  sure,  attacked  in  the  same  way, 
and  it  was  harder  for  her  to  bear.  A  few  weeks  afterwards 
she  withdrew  her  promise,  but  I  persevered,  and  three 
months  later  ,our  mutual  pledges  were  again  exchanged. 
For  three  years  our  engagement,  now  and  then  threatened, 
yet  remained  unbroken. 

Pressure  was  put  on  me  in  the  spring  of  1860,  not  by 
Annie  herself,  but  by  her  grandmother,  to  give  up  my 
quixotic  idea  of  throwing  up  the  India  House  employment. 


1859-60]  I    LEAVE   THE    INDIA    HOUSE  55 

Not  much  was  said  about  it,  for  I  believe  the  old  lady  thought 
that  long  before  I  had  saved  the  money  I  used  to  talk  of  I 
should  be  tired  of  waiting,  and  that  loving  Annie  as  she 
knew  I  did  I  should  marry  her,  instead  of  risking  her  future 
as  well  as  my  own  by  throwing  away  the  certainty  of  a 
sufficient  income,  easily  earned  and  sure  to  increase. 

How  far  her  forecast  would  have  proved  to  be  right  I 
cannot  tell,  for  in  1860  circumstances  occurred  which  solved 
the  question. 

In  the  summer  of  that  year  preparations  were  being  made 
for  removal  from  the  India  House  to  new  buildings  which 
were  being  put  up  at  Whitehall,  and  one  of  these  prepara- 
tions was  a  reorganisation  of  the  staff.  About  a  dozen  of 
the  least  valuable  of  the  clerks  in  the  different  departments 
were  privately  told  that  their  services  were  likely  to  be  dis- 
pensed with  upon  terms  of  pension  which  were  certainly 
not  illiberal.  But  these  clerks  knew  very  well  how  difficult 
it  would  be  for  them,  after  spending  years  in  the  enervating 
atmosphere  of  a  Government  office,  to  turn  to  another 
employment,  and  the  place  was  filled  with  their  complaints 
and  bemoanings.  I  saw  my  opportunity.  One  day  I 
went  to  the  room  of  Mr.  Sandoz,  the  Auditor-General,  who 
was  dealing  with  the  matter  of  reorganisation,  and  asked 
to  see  him.  I  told  him  I  was  about  to  go  away  for  my 
annual  holiday,  and  wished  to  know  before  I  went  if  my 
name  was  likely  to  be  on  the  list  of  those  who  were  to  leave. 
He  laughed,  and  told  me  I  might  have  spared  myself  the 
trouble  of  coming  to  see  him.  "  You  did  not  think/'  said 
he,  "  that  we  were  going  to  get  rid  of  our  competition  men 
when  it  cost  us  so  much  to  get  them." 

"  No,"  said  I,  "  I  did  not  think  so,  but  I  thought  you 
might  like  to  know  that  if  I  were  put  down  to  leave  on  the 
lowest  terms  of  compensation,  a  gratuity  of  one  year's 
earnings,  I  at  least  should  not  complain  as  others  are 
doing." 

He  became  serious  at  once,  and  asked  if  I  really  meant 
this.  Assured  that  I  did  he  asked  me  to  see  him  again 
after  my  holidays,  and  meanwhile  not  to  say  a  word  to  any 


56  THE    INDIA    HOUSE  [CHAP,  vi 

one  as  to  what  had  passed  between  us.  So  it  happened 
that  when  a  few  weeks  afterwards  the  definite  announce- 
ment of  retirements  was  made  my  colleagues  at  the  office 
and  my  friends  outside  were  astonished  to  find  my  name 
on  the  list.  In  October  1860  I  left  the  India  House  after 
a  service  of  only  twenty  months  with  a  compensation 
gratuity  of  £253. 


CHAPTER   VII 

THE  LAW   STUDENT  I     1861-1864 

THE  leaving  the  India  House  was  the  decisive  act  of  my 
life,  and  in  doing  it  I  felt  very  lonely.     There  was  no  one 
who  approved.    The  woman  who  loved  me  best  and  had 
the  greatest  belief  in  me — my  mother — my  sisters  and  my 
future  wife,  hoped,  but  hoped  very  doubtingly,  while  all 
others  remonstrated,  or  avoided  the  subject  and  shrugged 
shoulders  of  contempt  or  pity.     I  had  no  doubt  at  all. 
To  me  it  seemed  that  I  had  been  the  most  fortunate  of 
men.     In  the  course  of  these  twenty  months  I  had  saved 
about  £180,  which,  with  the  £253  given  me  for  leaving, 
made  up  the  sum  which  I  had  thought  of  as  enough  to 
carry  me  through  my  studies  for  the  Bar,  if  I  should  get, 
as  I  felt  sure  I  should,  one  of  those  Tancred  studentships, 
which,  as  I  before  said,  I  looked  upon  as  intended  by  Pro- 
vidence for  my  special  benefit.     The  first  thing  to  do  was 
to  ascertain  exactly  what  the  examination  would  be.     I 
went  to  see  the  clerk  to  the  Tancred  Trustees,  Mr.  Bartle 
Frere,  a  solicitor  of  high  standing  in  his  profession,  and  told 
him  my  story.     He  was  interested,  and  gave  me  all  the 
information  he  could ;    and  I  have  a  suspicion  that  later 
on  his  good  offices  helped  to  secure  my  election.     I  ascer- 
tained that  there  would  be  a  studentship  vacant  at  the 
following  Whitsuntide,  and  that  the  chief  subjects  of  ex- 
amination would  be  Roman  law,  certain  books  of  Quintilian 
and  Cicero,  and  two  books  of  Blacks  tone's  Commentaries. 
In  the  Quintilian  and  Cicero  were  my  chief  difficulties.     I 
had  reckoned  on  having  four  years  for  the  study  of  Latin, 
and  in  fact  had  only  had  five  terms  of  about  twelve  lessons 

57 


58  THE   LAW    STUDENT  [CHAP,  vn 

each  at  King's  College,  and  of  course  my  knowledge  came 
very  far  short  of  what  was  required  for  such  an  examination. 
It  looked  very  likely  that  I  should  fail  in  this  respect,  and 
that  I  should  have  to  wait  another  year  or  two  before  I 
could  fit  myself  for  the  competition.  But  I  set  to  work 
at  once.  I  bought  the  books  in  which  I  should  be  examined, 
and  went  to  a  private  tutor  who  was  strongly  recommended 
to  me  by  Mr.  Charles  Mackenzie. 

The  choice  was  not  a  happy  one.  He  was,  no  doubt,  a 
good  scholar,  but  he  was  a  strange  and  unmethodical  person, 
much  given  to  spiritualism,  and  not  very  apt  at  imparting 
knowledge.  But  I  struggled  on,  and  worked  hard  at  the 
prescribed  books  of  Blackstone,  which  I  believe  I  almost 
learned  by  heart,  only  to  have  the  mortification  of  finding 
when  the  examination  took  place  that  my  labour  had  been 
absolutely  wasted,  as  not  a  single  question  was  put  to  us 
upon  the  subject. 

The  date  of  the  examination  approached,  and  I  had  not 
nearly  gone  through  the  Cicero  and  Quintilian.  So  in 
desperation  I  bought  Bonn's  translation,  and  trusting  to  a 
memory  which  had  never  yet  failed  me,  I  read  over  the 
translation  so  carefully  and  so  often  that  I  believe  I  could 
reproduce  it  for  any  passage  of  the  original  which  might  be 
put  before  me.  It  was  the  very  worst  style  of  cramming, 
and  I  was  heartily  ashamed  of  it,  but  indeed  I  had  no  choice. 

In  due  time  I  went  to  Christ's  College,  Cambridge,  where 
about  twenty  candidates  were  examined.  I  felt  that  I  did 
not  do  well,  and  in  the  viva  voce  I  got  into  trouble  with  the 
examiners  over  the  word  "  imperium,"  to  which  I  erroneously 
gave  the  meaning  which  it  has  with  the  Primrose  League, 
and  not  that  which  it  had  with  the  Romans  and  with  Lord 
Beaconsfield.  If  the  grant  of  the  studentship  had  depended 
simply  upon  the  examination  I  believe  I  should  have 
failed,  for  the  Trinity  Hall  men  who  were  in  (Francillon  the 
novelist  among  them)  cannot  all  of  them  have  known  less 
Latin  than  I  did. 

But  other  influences  were  at  work  on  my  behalf.  My 
kind  old  friend  Dr.  Thomas  Allen  of  Brighton  tried  to 


1861-4]  A   TANCRED    STUDENT  59 

interest  Sir  Thomas  Watson,  who,  as  President  of  the 
College  of  Physicians,  was  one  of  the  Trustees,  in  my  favour, 
and  may  have  succeeded.  But  the  most  important  help 
came  from  the  Society  of  Arts.  Mr.  Harry  Chester  had  not 
forgotten  my  prize  takings  in  1856  and  1857,  an<^  a  resolu- 
tion passed  by  the  Council  of  the  Society  and  signed  by 
him  as  Chairman  was  sent  to  the  Trustees  asking  them  to 
elect  me  to  the  studentship.  They  did  so,  and  on  June  4th, 
1861,  I  paid  my  £30  of  fees,  no  caution  money  was  required, 
and  was  entered  as  a  Student  of  Lincoln's  Inn. 

The  Tancred  studentship  secured  me  an  income  of  £95  a 
year  for  the  three  years  which  must  elapse  before  my  call 
to  the  Bar,  and  for  three  years  afterwards. 

I  was  delighted  to  know  that  my  days  (or  I  should  rather 
say  my  years)  of  examinations  were  over.  There  was  then 
no  examination  required  for  call  to  the  Bar,  so  I  had  no 
need  to  trouble  any  more  about  Latin. 

I  have  never  opened  a  Latin  book  since,  and  I  never  found 
the  slightest  inconvenience  from  the  scantiness  of  my 
acquaintance  with  the  language. 

So  far  so  good.  But  I  wanted  more  money  yet  in  order 
to  keep  myself  comfortably,  and  another  source  of  income 
naturally  suggested  itself.  This  was  journalism.  To  ex- 
plain how  I  attempted  this  I  must  go  back  a  little.  I  said 
that  the  time  spent  in  working  at  English  law  had  been 
absolutely  wasted. 

So  far  as  the  examination  was  concerned  this  was  true. 
But  part  of  that  preparation  was  indirectly  of  the  greatest 
value  to  me.  I  had  been  attracted  by  the  announcement 
that  lectures  on  Constitutional  Law  were  delivered  at  the 
Working  Men's  College  at  Great  Ormond  Street  by  Mr. 
Thomas  Randall  Bennett,  barrister-at-law.  I  joined  the 
class,  and  was  soon  on  terms  of  friendship  with  the  lecturer. 
He  was  a  somewhat  remarkable  man. 

A  barrister  of  long  standing  and  much  ability,  he  was 
debarred  from  appearing  in  court  by  a  curvature  of  the 
spine  which  much  deformed  him  ;  but  he  had  a  consider- 
able practice  in  advising  and  drawing  pleadings  and  attend- 


60  THE   LAW   STUDENT  [CHAP,  vn 

ing  Judge's  chambers,  and  he  always  had  good  pupils  in 
his  chambers.  He  took  great  interest  in  me,  and  used  to 
talk  to  me  when  his  lecture  was  over,  and  was  greatly 
delighted  at  my  election  to  the  Tancred  Studentship. 

I  mentioned  to  him  one  day  my  wish  to  obtain  employ- 
ment on  a  newspaper,  and  he  told  me  he  knew  Mr.  James 
Johnstone,  who  owned  The  Morning  Herald  and  Standard, 
and  offered  to  give  me  an  introduction  to  him,  suggesting 
that  I  should  write  a  leading  article  on  some  public  question, 
and  send  it  for  Mr.  Johnstone  to  consider.  So  I  wrote  an 
article  on  public  education,  then,  as  always,  a  matter  of  news- 
paper controversy,  and  Mr.  Bennett  enclosed  it  in  a  letter 
to  Mr.  Johnstone.  The  result  was  a  request  to  call  at  the 
office  in  Shoe  Lane.  I  went  and  had  a  long  talk  with  Mr. 
Johnstone  and  with  Captain  Thomas  Hamber,  the  editor, 
and  I  came  away  from  the  interview  with  a  permanent 
engagement  to  write  reviews  of  books  for  the  two  news- 
papers, averaging  four  columns  a  week,  at  a  weekly  salary 
of  two  guineas.  This  was  in  August  1862.  I  began  my 
duties  at  once,  and  for  three  years  I  regularly  contributed 
on  those  terms,  and  wrote  more  than  half  of  the  literary 
matter  which  appeared  in  these  papers.  Now  I  felt  that 
my  course  was  clear.  I  settled  down  with  much  content- 
ment to  work  that  was  far  more  congenial  than  the 
monotonous  ledgers  of  the  India  House.  I  was  regular 
in  attendance  at  lectures  and  classes,  and  read  a  great 
deal  at  the  library,  and  occasionally  by  way  of  relaxation 
went  into  the  Chancery  Court  (for  the  Common  Law  Courts 
were  too  far  away)  and  listened  to  the  speeches  of  Cairns 
and  Palmer  and  Mellish  and  Rolt. 

Resolved  that  the  newspaper  work  should  not  interfere 
with  my  legal  studies,  I  laid  down  a  rule  for  myself  which 
was  seldom  broken  that  I  would  not  do  it  until  after  seven 
o'clock  in  the  evening.  But  the  course  of  legal  education 
is  (or  at  all  events  was)  very  easy,  and  had  many  holidays, 
so  there  was  plenty  of  time  for  another  study  to  which  I 
now  seriously  devoted  myself. 

It  was  the  study  of  rhetoric ;  an  art  so  valuable,  indeed 


i86i-4]  THE   HARDWICKE   SOCIETY  61 

so  essential  to  the  advocate  who  wishes  to  be  something 
more  than  a  desultory  prattler,  that  one  would  think  no 
pressure  would  be  needed  to  induce  the  Inns  of  Court  to 
teach  it  or  to  induce  students  to  learn  and  practise  it.  But 
there  is  no  teaching  at  the  Inns  ;  the  benchers  for  the  most 
part  never  studied  it  themselves  and  have  managed  to  get 
on  without  it ;  and  I  have  found  students  so  well  satisfied 
with  their  own  capacity  for  saying  whatever  they  want  to 
say,  that  I  have  almost  invariably  failed  to  persuade  them 
to  acquire  one  of  the  pleasantest,  and  certainly  the  best  paid 
of  the  arts.  I  was  determined  that  if  I  failed  to  become  a 
great  speaker  it  should  not  be  from  want  of  trying,  so  I 
embarked  on  a  systematic  course  of  study.  Whately, 
Aristotle,  Quintilian,  and  Cicero  (the  classic  authors  of  course 
in  translation)  were  my  teachers,  and  I  studied  the  speeches 
of  great  orators — especially  Erskine  and  Plunket — to  find 
in  them  examples  and  illustrations  of  the  rules  laid  down 
in  the  books.  With  the  same  purpose  I  became  a  regular 
attendant  at  the  debates  of  the  "  Hardwicke  Society,"  the 
best  debating  society  I  have  ever  known. 

It  used  to  meet  in  a  back  room  at  Dick's  Coffee  House, 
and  the  attendance  was  then  only  from  fifteen  to  twenty. 
But  among  the  regular  attendants  and  frequent  speakers 
were  some  notable  men.  Leonard  Courtney,  Frederic 
Harrison,  Montague  Cookson,  and  Vernon  and  Godfrey 
Lushington,  were  very  often  there,  and  Giffard  and  Herschell 
and  Charles  Russell  came  occasionally. 

I  was  the  Honorary  Secretary  of  the  Society  for  four 
years  (1865-8)  and  then  President  (the  first,  for  until 
then  the  senior  member  of  committee  present  took  the 
chair)  for  three  years,  and  I  have  never  ceased  to  try  to 
persuade  students  and  young  barristers  not  to  neglect  the 
advantages  which  such  a  society  offers. 

My  eldest  son  was  Secretary  in  1898,  and  President 
in  1899  ;  I  dedicated  to  the  Society  my  volume  of  forensic 
speeches,  and  in  1904  the  Society  did  me  the  honour  of  making 
me  the  chief  guest  at  its  annual  dinner  in  honour  of  my 
completing  forty  years  of  practice  at  the  Bar. 


62  THE    LAW    STUDENT  [CHAP,  vn 

There  was  yet  another  means  of  education  in  public 
speaking,  and  I  did  not  neglect  it. 

From  my  boyhood  the  great  attraction  of  the  Bar  to  me 
was  not  that  it  would  be  a  pleasant  and,  I  hoped,  a  profitable 
occupation,  but  that  it  was  the  only  road  by  which  I  could 
make  my  way  into  the  House  of  Commons. 

So  I  wanted  as  early  as  possible  to  become  familiar  with 
the  atmosphere  of  the  House,  and  I  wished  there  to  study 
the  styles  and  methods  of  the  great  masters  of  debate.  My 
friend  Henry  Morley  was  then  editor  of  The  Examiner,  a 
weekly  paper  which  was  published  every  Saturday  morning, 
and  I  asked  him  to  try  to  get  me  an  order  for  the  reporters' 
gallery.  There  was  no  great  reason  for  his  having  one,  for 
it  was  only  occasionally  that  a  late  debate  on  a  Friday 
night  could  usefully  be  reported  in  his  paper. 

But  he  thought  he  would  like  a  representative  in  the 
gallery,  so  with  some  trouble  he  persuaded  Colonel  Taylor 
to  obtain  an  order  admitting  me  every  Thursday  and  Friday. 
I  had  this  privilege  for  several  years,  and  made  the  most 
of  this  great  opportunity  of  study.  I  was  almost  always 
there  on  Thursday  evening,  patiently  watching  the  debate, 
practising  my  shorthand,  although  it  very  seldom  happened 
that  I  had  occasion  to  take  full  notes  of  a  speech,  always 
listening  to  the  speeches  of  the  leading  men  as  lessons  by 
which  I  might  thereafter  profit. 

So  having  abandoned  the  learning  of  a  superfluous 
language  I  supplied  its  place  by  a  study  much  more  pleasant 
and  ten  times  more  profitable  ;  the  more  profitable,  indeed, 
because  so  few  took  the  trouble  to  engage  in  it. 

My  time  would  now  seem  to  have  been  fully  occupied. 
Mornings  and  afternoons  I  was  busy  at  classes  or  lectures, 
or  reading  in  the  library,  sometimes  law,  sometimes  logic 
and  rhetoric.  In  term  time  I  almost  always  dined  in  Hall, 
for  there  the  dinner  was  good  and  very  cheap.  On  Thursday 
evening  I  was  at  the  House  of  Commons,  and  on  Friday  at 
the  Hardwicke,  and  afterwards  went  to  the  House  of 
Commons  in  order  to  take  up  to  The  Examiner  office  in  Wind- 
mill Street,  if  any  important  debate  was  on,  the  latest  news 


1861-4]  WORKING    MEN'S    CLUBS  63 

of  the  discussion  and  division.  On  Wednesday  and  on 
every  Sunday  I  was  at  Gloucester  Cottages,  and  on  three 
nights  of  the  week,  of  which  Saturday  was  always  one,  I 
worked  from  seven  or  eight  in  the  evening  until  two  or  three 
in  the  morning,  reading  and  reviewing  the  books  which  came 
from  Shoe  Lane,  where  I  attended  every  Friday  afternoon 
to  receive  my  two  guineas  and  sign  the  salaries  book. 

It  would  seem  these  occupations  were  sufficient,  but  in 
1862  I  took  up  another  piece  of  work  for  which,  during 
several  years,  I  managed  to  find  a  good  deal  of  time. 

In  that  year  the  Association  for  the  Promotion  of  Social 
Science  held  its  annual  conference  at  the  Guildhall,  and  I 
read  a  paper,  afterwards  published  in  the  Transactions, 
upon  Evening  Classes  for  Young  Men.  As  an  outcome  of 
the  discussion  which  then  took  place  a  small  meeting  was 
held  at  Waterloo  Place  on  June  i4th,  1862, 1  Lord  Brougham 
presiding,  at  which  it  was  resolved  to  establish  a  society 
whose  object  should  be  to  bring  together  in  a  central  and 
controlling  organisation  the  existing  Mechanics'  Institutions 
and  Workmen's  Clubs,  and  to  aid  in  establishing  other 
clubs  upon  the  pattern  which  should  be  found  most  popular 
and  effective.  The  Rev.  T.  Rylance,  a  Church  of  England 
clergyman,  the  Rev.  H.  Solly,  a  Unitarian,  who  called 
himself  an  English  Presbyterian,  and  the  Rev.  David 
Thomas,  a  distinguished  Wesleyan  Methodist,  were  the 
active  founders  of  the  Society,  which  was  called  the  Working 
Men's  Club  and  Institute  Union,  and  which  by  1912  had 
grown  into  a  useful  and  powerful  organisation  having  480,000 
members  and  1,500  affiliated  clubs. 

I  was  at  the  meeting  at  Waterloo  Place,  was  a  member 
of  the  provisional  committee,  and  became  the  first  Honorary 
Secretary  of  the  Union. 

With  Lord  Lyttelton  as  our  President,  a  great  deal  of 
good  work  was  done,  and  my  first  experience  in  addressing 
public  meetings  was  gained  when  I  accompanied  Mr.  Solly 
to  various  parts  of  London  and  certain  towns  in  the  country 

1  On  June  i4th,  1912,  I  spoke  at  the  Jubilee  Dinner  of  the  Union, 
being  the  only  survivor  of  the  founders. 


64  THE    LAW    STUDENT  [CHAP,  vil 

and  spoke  to  large  meetings  of  working  men.  It  is  a  pleasant 
recollection  for  me  that  at  Willis's  Rooms  in  1865  I 
spoke  at  a  meeting  where  Lord  Brougham  presided,  and 
heard  the  veteran  of  eighty-seven  say  very  kind  things 
about  his  young  supporter  of  twenty-four. 

My  work  was  going  on  pleasantly,  and  I  was  content  and 
happy,  when  in  1863  my  hopes  of  the  future  were  suddenly 
and  heavily  clouded.  I  had  taken  my  betrothed  to  some 
readings  at  St.  Dunstan's  schoolroom,  where  I  read  Tenny- 
son's "  Enoch  Arden."  She  was  greatly  touched  by  it,  and 
so  I  lent  her  the  finest  prose  version  of  that  story  that  has 
ever  been  written,  Sylvia's  Lovers,  by  Mrs.  Gaskell.  She 
read  it,  and  when  next  I  saw  her  after  she  had  done  so  she 
told  me  she  could  not  love  me  as  a  wife  should  love,  and 
begged  me  to  release  her  from  her  promise.  I  have  no 
doubt  that  she  had  long  been  urged  by  her  grandmother 
to  take  this  step.  The  old  lady  was  sorely  troubled  at  my 
having  given  up  the  certain  income  of  the  India  House  for 
what  seemed  the  very  doubtful  chances  of  a  profession. 
As  she  one  day  said  to  me,  getting  briefs  was  like  picking  up 
sovereigns  on  the  pavement  in  Fleet  Street — you  might 
happen  to  find  them,  but  then  you  might  not.  And  poor 
Annie  had  not,  I  think,  much  sympathy  from  her  sister  and 
her  friends.  I  was  not  a  favourite  with  girls.  I  am  told 
that  I  was  conceited  and  sarcastic,  and  no  doubt  ambition 
is  selfish  in  its  methods  if  not  in  its  intentions. 

Still  I  do  not  believe  she  would  have  broken  off  the 
engagement  if  I  had  not  had  a  rival  in  her  recollections  of 
a  young  sailor  to  whom  her  first  girlish  love  had  been  given. 
I  believe  his  name  was  Frederick  Day,  but  I  am  not  sure. 

He  was  never  at  any  time,  before  or  after  marriage, 
mentioned  between  us.  But  I  have  no  doubt  that  in  her 
mind  he  was  identified  with  the  Charlie  Kinraid  in  Mrs. 
Gaskell's  story,  and  that  I  represented  the  much  less  attrac- 
tive Philip  Hepburn,  and  that  her  declaration  to  me  was 
the  honest  confession  of  a  love  which  was  not  wholly  dead, 
and  which  the  reading  of  that  most  touching  story  had 
revived.  So  we  parted.  But  I  refused  to  be  defeated  by 


i86i-4]  IN   THE   PUPIL   ROOM  6$ 

the  shadow  of  a  bygone  day.     I  went  back  to  my  work  with 
an  aching  heart,  but  in  the  circumstances  which  had  brought 
about  my  disappointment  I  found  consolation  and  some 
ground  of  hope.     I  had  not  been  ousted  by  a  living  rival 
who  might  as  soon  as  I  was  gone  step  in  and  take  possession. 
The  sailor  lover  might  not  still  be  living ;   it  was  unlikely 
that  he  would  come  back.    And  the  thoughts  of  him  which 
my  reading  and  the  loan  of  the  book  had  unfortunately 
revived  might  guard  her  heart  against  another  even  more 
strongly  than  against  myself.    At  all  events,  she  knew  that 
I  loved  her.    The  time  might  yet  come  when  that  faithful 
and  unwavering  love  would  claim  and  receive  its  reward. 
'  Time  and  I  against  any  two,"  I  would  still  wait. 
The  years  of  study  were  nearly  half  gone.    There  was,  as 
I  said,  no  examination  to  pass,  but  it  was  necessary  that  I 
should  spend  a  year  as  pupil  in  a  barrister's  chambers. 
Here  again  my  staunch  friend  Mr.  Bennett   helped  me. 
Of  course  I  was  anxious  that  the  year  should  be  spent 
with  him. 

I  had  money  enough  to  pay  the  regulation  fee  of  one 
hundred  guineas,  and  offered  to  do  so,  but  he  would  not 
hear  of  it,  and  gave  me  the  qualifying  year  without  taking 
any  fee  at  all.  That  year  was  a  delightful  experience.  The 
other  pupils  were  Montagu  Corry  (afterwards  Lord  Rowton), 
Evelyn  Ashley,  whom  I  met  much  later  in  political  life,  and 
a  certain  Paul  Panton  of  whom  I  know  nothing  but  his 
name. 

In  the  back  room  of  the  chambers  was  a  former  pupil 
lately  called  to  the  Bar,  and  making  a  good  beginning  on  the 
Oxford  circuit,  a  famous  cricketer  and  one  of  the  hand- 
somest and  most  genial  of  good  fellows,  the  late  Counsel  to 
the  Speaker,  Chandos  Leigh. 

He  was  the  life  and  soul  of  the  place  ;  Ashley  was  a  quiet 
student ;  Corry  did  not  study  at  all,  but  came  late  and 
not  very  regularly,  and  amused  himself  by  putting  the 
births,  deaths,  and  marriages  of  The  Times  into  doggerel 
verse. 

I  had  managed  to  learn  a  good  deal  of  law,  and  was,  I 


66  THE    LAW   STUDENT  [CHAP,  vn 

think,  rather  helpful  to  my  kind  friend,  and  he  was  more 
than  kind  to  me,  taking  pains  to  direct  me  in  my  work  and 
help  me  with  it  and  teaching  me  the  delightful  science  of 
pleading,  of  which  he  was  a  master. 

His  clients  were  for  the  most  part  of  good  professional 
standing,  but  one  of  them  from  whom  many  cases  came  was 
a  solicitor  named  Leverson,  who  was  afterwards  convicted 
of  fraud  and  struck  off  the  rolls.  The  clerk  who  often 
brought  papers  from  him  was  Charles  Bradlaugh. 

I  was  very  grateful  to  Mr.  Bennett  for  the  help  thus  given, 
and  some  years  afterwards  when  I  was  taking  pupils  I  took 
without  fee  a  young  student  who  was  not  very  well  off,  on 
condition  that  he  in  his  turn  should  do  the  same.  He  gained 
success  and  some  distinction  at  the  Bar,  and  kept  his  under- 
taking, and  I  believe  the  series  of  free  pupils  thus  started 
is  still  continued. 

My  call  to  the  Bar  was  to  take  place  in  Michaelmas  Term, 
1864,  but  it  was  nearly  being  delayed  by  a  curious  accident. 
It  was  required  that  the  student  desiring  to  be  called  should 
appear  before  the  benchers  at  a  council  held  a  few  days 
before  the  call  day.  On  the  day  fixed  for  this  council  I 
went  to  my  room  at  Moorgate  Street  in  the  early  afternoon 
to  rest.  I  had  been  at  work  very  late  the  night  before,  and 
lying  down  on  the  bed  I  went  to  sleep,  and  woke  to  find 
that  it  was  within  five  minutes  of  the  time  I  should  be  at 
Lincoln's  Inn.  In  great  alarm,  for  not  only  would  my  call 
be  postponed,  but  the  postponement  might  involve  the 
forfeiture  of  my  Tancred  Studentship,  which  was  held  on 
the  condition  that  the  student  should  be  called  on  the 
earliest  date  possible  under  the  rules  of  the  Inn,  I  rushed 
downstairs,  found  a  hansom,  and  drove  as  fast  as  I  could  to 
Lincoln's  Inn.  There,  as  I  feared,  I  found  the  business  was 
over,  the  steward,  Mr.  Doyle,  had  gone  away  with  his  books 
and  the  Council  had  broken  up.  I  asked  what  benchers 
were  still  there,  and  among  the  names  mentioned  was  that 
of  Sir  Fitzroy  Kelly.  I  sent  in  my  name  and  asked  to  speak 
with  him.  He  came  out  and  heard  my  story,  and  then 
taking  me  back  with  him  into  the  room  asked  the  benchers 


i86i-4]  CALLED   TO   THE   BAR  67 

there  to  recall  the  steward  and  have  my  name  entered  as 
having  kept  the  introduction.  Not  content  with  this,  he 
took  me  with  him  to  another  room  and  had  a  long  talk  with 
me  about  the  Tancred  Studentship  and  other  matters,  and 
in  after-years  he  remembered  to  my  advantage  the  interview 
which  had  been  so  strangely  brought  about. 

All  the  requirements  were  now  fulfilled,  and  on  November 
I7th,  1864,  the  dream  of  my  boyhood  was  fulfilled  and  I 
became  a  barrister  of  Lincoln's  Inn. 


CHAPTER  vnl 

SOME  LIGHTER  RECOLLECTIONS 

I  CAME  very  early  to  be  a  lover  of  the  theatre.  My  mother 
disliked  it  on  religious  grounds  and  would  not  go,  but  she 
used  to  take  great  pains  with  my  reading,  and  was  very  fond 
of  hearing  me  recite  poetry.  My  father  was  very  fond  of 
the  theatre,  and  my  great  treat  when  I  was  home  for  the 
holidays  from  my  school  at  Edmonton  was  to  be  taken  by 
him  to  see  Charles  Kean  and  his  wife  in  one  of  Shakespeare's 
plays  at  the  Princess's  Theatre  in  Oxford  Street. 

The  accident  that  the  teacher  of  elocution  at  College 
House  had  been  an  actor,  and  that  he  took  a  special  interest 
in  me,  did  much  to  foster  my  own  inclinations,  and  reading 
Shakespeare  and  reciting  dialogues  with  my  teacher  formed 
the  favourite  amusement  of  my  schoolboy  days. 

It  was  at  the  breaking-up  entertainment  at  College  House 
in  December  1851  that  I,  not  quite  eleven  years  of  age, 
recited  Othello's  "  Address  to  the  Senate,"  and  confessed 
that  it  was  true  "that  I  had  stole  away  the  old  man's 
daughter ;  true  I  had  married  her." 

Then  came,  as  I  have  before  related,  the  City  Commercial 
School  in  Lombard  Street,  where  this  particular  bent  of  mine 
found  everything  to  encourage  it.  Our  dear  old  headmaster, 
William  Pinches,  was  a  great  lover  of  poetry  and  the  drama, 
and  every  year  the  boys  gave  an  elocutionary  entertainment 
at  Sussex  Hall,  Leadenhall  Street,  the  preparation  for  which 
was  to  him  the  greatest  enjoyment  of  the  year.  When  I 
went  to  the  school  in  January  1853  he  had  just  lost  a  pupil 
who  was  his  favourite  elocutionist.  It  was  the  boy  who 
afterwards  as  Henry  Irving  became  known  as  the  foremost 

68 


EARLY    VISITS   TO   THE  THEATRE  69 

actor  of  his  time.  I  did  not  know  him  until  many  years 
afterwards,  but  I  was  very  jealous  of  him,  for  when  I  had 
become  one  of  the  principal  reciters  at  the  school  my  self- 
conceit  used  to  be  sorely  wounded  when  after  I  had  done  my 
very  best  Mr.  Pinches  would  say,  "  Very  good,  Clarke,  very 
good,  but  I  should  like  you  to  have  heard  Brodribb  do  that." 

One  of  my  school-fellows  was  nephew  of  a  Mr.  George 
Behr,  who  kept  the  George  Hotel  which  gave  its  name  to 
the  yard  where  that  school  stood,  and  we  two  boys  were 
occasionally  taken  to  Sadler's  Wells  Theatre,  where  Phelps 
was  then  in  the  midst  of  a  management  which  was  very 
memorable  in  the  annals  of  the  English  stage.  He  was 
himself  a  fine  actor,  admirable  in  elocution,  dignified  in 
bearing,  impressive  in  tragedy  and  delightful  in  comedy, 
very  pathetic  as  Lear,  and  with  true  humour  in  Sir  Pertinax 
McSycophant.  With  him  was  Henry  Marston,  sadly 
handicapped  by  an  unpleasantly  harsh  voice,  but  a  fine 
actor,  the  best  Ghost  in  Hamlet  I  ever  saw,  and  with  the 
exception  of  Henry  Irving  the  best  lago.  Mrs.  Charles 
Young  as  Desdemona  was  delightful. 

During  the  two  years  1853  and  1854  I  went  now  and 
then  to  the  Princess's,  and  there  I  saw  the  notable  revival 
of  Henry  VIII,  which  was  quite  equal  in  the  beauty  and 
completeness  of  its  staging  to  the  famous  Lyceum  pro- 
duction many  years  later.  Wolsey  and  Louis  XI  were  to 
my  thinking  Charles  Kean's  best  parts ;  Mrs.  Charles 
Kean  with  less  force  and  less  personal  beauty  than  Ellen 
Terry  had  more  of  queenly  dignity  and  of  pathetic  grace. 
Ryder,  a  fine  elocutionist,  made  a  noble  Buckingham, 
while  Cooper  as  Griffith  showed  how  much  a  good  actor 
can  make  of  a  small  part. 

I  was  a  favourite  with  my  schoolmaster  and  was  admitted 
to  his  private  friendship,  and  so  I  became  acquainted  with 
his  sons.  One  of  them  about  my  own  age,  Edward  Ewen 
Pinches,  who  would  I  feel  sure  have  distinguished  himself 
at  the  Bar  if  he  had  not  had  the  fatal  good  fortune  of  marry- 
ing a  rich  wife,  was  my  closest  and  dearest  friend  for  sixty 
years.  His  elder  brother  Conrad,  who  published  an 
6 


70  SOME   LIGHTER    RECOLLECTIONS     [CHAP,  vin 

excellent  book  on  Elocution,  kept  a  school  called  Clarendon 
House  in  the  Lambeth  Road,  and  at  one  of  the  elocutionary 
entertainments  there  William  Creswick,  then  in  joint 
management  of  the  Surrey  Theatre  with  William  Sheppard, 
saw  me  and  I  think  took  a  fancy  to  me.  He  put  me  on 
the  free-list  of  the  Surrey  Theatre,  and  for  a  year  or 
two  I  occasionally  found  my  way  to  the  Blackfriars' 
Road  when  I  could  be  spared  from  the  shop  before  the 
closing  hour. 

Creswick  ("  Uncle  Bill "  his  professional  associates  used 
to  call  him)  was  an  actor  quite  worthy  to  be  remembered 
with  Phelps  and  Kean.  His  opportunities  were  fewer,  for 
the  Old  Surrey  was  much  given  to  transpontine  melodrama 
(The  Orange  Girl  was  one  of  its  greatest  successes),  but 
there  was  occasionally  a  Shakespearean  Season,  and  I  well 
remember  one  fortnight  when  Julius  C&sar  was  presented, 
and  Phelps  and  Creswick  alternated  the  parts  of  Brutus 
and  Cassius.  Phelps  was  at  his  best  as  Brutus.  Antony 
(then  considered  an  inferior  part)  was  very  well  played  by 
a  young  actor  named  Verner,  who  died  shortly  afterwards 
in  a  London  hospital. 

(Creswick' s  health  failed,  and  he  went  some  time  later 
on  a  tour  in  Australia,  which  did  him  good  financially  as 
well  as  physically.  When  he  was  coming  home  some  one 
told  Byron  that  Creswick  was  coming  back  a  new  man. 
"  Good  heavens,"  said  Byron,  "you  don't  say  so.  I  hope 
he  is  not  coming  back  Sheppard.") 

Just  before  the  close  of  the  Crimean  War  I  wrote  a  drama 
of  Russian  life  in  blank  verse,  called  it  The  Serf,  and  sent  it 
to  Creswick.  He  wisely  rejected  it,  and  I,  burning  the 
manuscript,  made  an  end  of  my  first  and  last  attempt  at 
dramatic  authorship. 

My  next  theatrical  recollections  are  of  a  very  different 
kind.  At  sixteen  or  seventeen  fancies  lightly  turn  to 
thoughts  of  love,  and  I  fell  deeply  in  love,  as  hundreds  of 
others  were  doing  then  and  for  many  years  afterwards, 
with  the  quite  too  utterly  delightful  Marie  Wilton.  I  used 
to  gaze  upon  her  from  the  pit,  and  once  I  left  a  bouquet  at 


A   QUOTATION  71 

the  stage  door  in  Surrey  Street,  and  I  dare  say  left  a  letter 
with  it.  But  nothing  came  of  it,  and  nearly  thirty  years 
passed  by  before  I  had  the  pleasure  of  knowing  her.  But 
I  can  almost  see  her  now  as  she  came  on  the  stage  in  The 
Miller  and  his  Men,  dragging  her  master's  portmanteau. 
In  top  hat,  short  skirted  coat,  white  breeches  and  top  boots 
she  was  the  smartest,  sweetest  little  tiger  ever  seen.  One 
night  in  the  eighties  I  had  to  take  her  in  to  dinner  at  Lady 
Jeune's.  Something  was  said ;  I  think  she  asked  a  question 
about  my  memory  or  about  my  liking  for  poetry.  So  I 
said  in  an  undertone, 

"  Oh,  I  wish  I'd  never  left  my  mother's  extremely  humble 
but  remarkably  virtuous  roof  ever  to  become  a  wife. 

"  But  the  longest  lane  has  a  turning,  and  the  best  of 
friends  must  part,  and  so  must  the  worst  of  enemies,  and 
marriage  is  only  for  life. 

"  So  I  suppose  I  must  put  up  with  the  kicks  and  the  cuffs 
and  the  insults  and  the  punches  on  the  head  suitable  to  my 
sad  situation, 

"  Till  poison  or  something  of  the  kind  puts  an  end  to  the 
broken-hearted  Ravina,  or  I  can  sneak  out  on  the  quiet 
and  get  an  economical  but  strictly  legal  separation." 

She  laughed,  and  I  then  confessed  my  early  devotion, 
and  we  had  a  chat  about  the  old  times  when  she  and  Patty 
Oliver,  and  John  Clarke,  and  Rogers  the  broken-hearted 
Ravina,  were  the  quartette  which  made  the  fame  and  fortune 
of  the  little  theatre  in  the  Strand. 

It  seemed  with  me  that  all  roads  led  to  the  theatre.  In 
1859  I  went  to  the  evening  classes  at  King's  College  and 
joined  the  English  Literature  Class  taught  by  Henry  Morley, 
who  was  a  great  dramatic  critic. 

He  was  very  friendly  towards  me,  and  from  time  to  time 
would  ask  me  to  go  with  him  to  a  first  performance.  And 
he  took  me  with  him  one  evening  to  Westland  Marston's 
house  at  Primrose  Hill.  Here  every  Sunday  evening  there 
was  a  very  pleasant  informal  gathering  of  literary  and 
theatrical  people. 

From  eight  o'clock  onward  those  who  enjoyed  the  privilege 


72  SOME   LIGHTER    RECOLLECTIONS     [CHAP,  vm 

of  a  standing  invitation  came  dropping  in.  Cigars  were  on 
the  table ;  presently  sandwiches  and  decanters  of  whisky 
were  set  out.  Guests  came  and  went  without  ceremony, 
and  the  host,  himself  a  delightful  man  of  letters,  led  and 
stimulated  a  conversation  which  was  always  interesting 
and  often  brilliant.  There  I  met  Mrs.  Lynn  Linton,  a 
woman  of  extraordinary  intellectual  gifts.  There  too  began 
an  acquaintance  with  Moy  Thomas  which  grew  to  some- 
thing closer  than  acquaintance  and  lasted  many  years.  And 
I  think  it  was  there  I  first  met  Hain  Fri swell,  at  whose  house 
in  Russell  Street,  Bloomsbury  Square,  I  afterwards  met 
Henry  Irving,  and  began  the  friendly  intimacy  with  him 
which  lasted  till  his  death.  But  to  me  the  most  attractive 
person  at  these  gatherings  was  the  gentle  son  of  the  house, 
the  blind  poet  Philip  Bourke  Marston,  whose  early  death 
silenced  a  music  which  was  steadily  growing  in  strength 
and  beauty. 

One  evening  I  went  to  the  house  rather  early,  and  found 
sitting  before  the  fire  with  her  hair  loose  upon  her  shoulders 
the  most  beautiful  woman  I  had  ever  seen.  It  was  Adelaide 
Neilson,  who  was  then  the  leading  lady  in  Westland  Mar- 
ston's  play  of  Life  for  Life  at  the  Adelphi  Theatre.  I  dislike 
superlatives,  but  I  will  leave  this  standing.  Mrs.  Stirling 
told  me  that  Mary  Anderson  was  the  most  beautiful  woman 
she  had  ever  seen  on  the  stage.  W.  S.  Gilbert  said  the  same 
thing  of  Julia  Neilson.  But  both  admitted  to  me  that 
Adelaide  Neilson  was  not  unworthy  to  be  put  in  comparison 
with  either. 

I  met  Adelaide  Neilson  several  times  in  later  years, 
waltzed  with  her  when  her  husband  brought  her  to  the 
Scottish  Ball,  and  had  the  pleasure  of  rendering  her  some 
little  service  with  my  advice  in  a  legal  matter.  She  was  in 
all  respects  a  delightful  person. 

For  several  years  my  time  was  so  filled  with  work  that 
I  hardly  ever  went  to  the  theatre,  but  soon  after  I  left  the 
India  House  I  made  the  acquaintance  of  another  very 
charming  actress — Nellie  Farren.  A  friend  of  mine  who 
was  in  some  way  interested  in  the  Victoria  Theatre  took 


AN    EVENING   WALK  73 

me  there  one  evening  and  we  went  behind  the  scenes. 
Nellie  Farren  was  then  "Singing  Chambermaid"  in  the 
regular  company.  She  lived  with  her  mother  in  Richmond 
Road,  Barnsbury,  where  they  kept  a  little  school,  and  Nellie, 
who  had  a  very  small  salary,  used  to  walk  to  and  from  the 
theatre  in  the  Waterloo  Road  ;  sometimes,  when  rehearsals 
were  on,  twice  in  the  day. 

One  night  she  consented  to  my  seeing  her  home,  and  we 
went  through  the  New  Cut  to  the  Blackfriars  Road  and 
turned  up  towards  the  bridge.  As  we  came  near  it  an 
elderly  man  who  was  sitting  on  a  doorstep  got  up  and 
touched  his  hat  and  said,  "  Good-night,  miss."  "  Good- 
night," said  Nellie.  "  I  shall  not  want  you  to-night."  We 
walked  on,  and  when  we  came  to  Smithfield  two  young 
men  were  waiting  at  a  street  corner.  She  bade  them  good- 
night and  said,  "  I  have  escort  to-night,  you  see,  so  I  shall 
not  want  you."  Then  she  explained  that  every  night  these 
three  waited  for  her,  and  walked  behind  her  to  see  that  she 
was  not  molested.  The  elder  man  followed  as  far  as  Smith- 
field,  and  the  young  men  saw  her  safe  to  her  own  door.  It 
was  a  chivalrous  service  freely  rendered.  The  devotion 
of  the  young  men  of  the  Waterloo  Road  was  somewhat 
embarrassing,  for  on  Sunday  afternoons  they  would  make 
pilgrimages  to  Barnsbury  and  stand  in  a  row  opposite  the 
house  hoping  to  get  a  peep  at  her. 

She  was  soon  carried  off  to  other  scenes.  Alfred  and 
Horace  Wigan  were  managing  the  Olympic,  and  Horace 
went  round  to  the  minor  theatres  to  try  to  pick  up  talent. 
He  found  a  prize  in  Nellie  Farren,  and  soon  she  was  appear- 
ing in  the  burlesque  of  King  Alfred,  where  I  remember 
her  singing  "  Musty  bread  and  fusty  water,  bag  of  straw 
to  lie  upon  and  pillow  of  rusty  nails."  I  do  not  think 
she  appeared  with  Robson  in  the  burlesque  of  The 
Merchant  of  Venice,  in  which  that  wonderful  little  man 
used  to  play  one  scene,  the  lament  for  his  daughter's 
flight,  as  tragedy,  and  showed  the  extraordinary  range  of 
his  genius. 

It  was  a  little  later  than  this  that  I  made  the  acquaint- 


74  SOME    LIGHTER    RECOLLECTIONS     [CHAP,  vin 

ance  of  another  beautiful  young  actress,  Ada  Cavendish, 
whose  first  appearance  was  in  the  burlesque  of  Ixion  at  the 
Royalty  Theatre  in  Dean  Street,  Soho.  It  is  hardly  correct 
to  call  her  an  actress,  for  at  that  time  she  could  not  act  at 
all.  She  sang  very  little  and  could  not  dance.  Her  at- 
traction was  in  her  beauty  of  face  and  figure.  She  wore 
what  was  then  thought  a  very  daring  costume,  open  at  the 
side  as  high  as  the  waist  and  revealing,  as  she  moved  some- 
what awkwardly  about  the  stage,  a  leg  and  thigh  of  sur- 
passing beauty. 

A  fellow- student  of  mine  at  Lincoln's  Inn  had  rooms  at 
the  top  of  the  house  at  the  north-east  corner  of  Lincoln's 
Inn  Fields,  and  my  acquaintance  with  Ada  Cavendish  began 
at  a  supper  he  gave  where  she  and  Lydia  Maitland,  the 
Ixion  of  the  play,  were  present.    For  some  time  I  saw  her 
pretty  often.     She  lived  over  a  shoemaker's  shop  in  Queen 
Street,  and  I  remember  once  going  with  her  to  tea  with 
Lydia  Thompson,  who  lodged  in  Henrietta  Street,  Covent 
Garden.     She  often  lunched  in  the  little  back  room  of 
Creighton's,  a  pastrycook's  shop  in  the  Strand,  close  to  the 
old  office  of  The  Globe  newspaper,  which  was  rather  a  meeting- 
place  for  actresses.    There  I  made  the  acquaintance  of 
Lydia  Foote  and  little  Miss  Raynham.     Ada  Cavendish 
was  a  tall  and  handsome  girl,  and  she  told  me,  I  believe 
quite  truly,  that  Cavendish  was  her  father's  name.     It  was 
but  a  small  salary  that  she  got  at  the  Royalty,  and  she  lived 
very  quietly  and  economically.     But  one  day  that  I  met 
her  I  noticed  that  she  was  unusually  well  dressed.     She 
explained  that  her  father  had  sent  his  steward  to  see  her, 
and  had  arranged  that  in  future  she  was  to  receive  an 
allowance  through  him.     Soon  afterwards  she  came  under 
the  tuition  of  Sothern,  and  he  made  her  a  really  fine  actress. 
Her  Mercy  Merrick  in  The  New  Magdalen  and  Julie  de 
Mortemar  in  Richelieu  were  very  notable  performances. 
After  losing  sight  of  her  for  many  years  I  met  her  again 
at  one  of  Irving' s  receptions  at  the  Lyceum,  and  then  I 
used  occasionally  to  call  and  see  her  and  her  husband, 
Marshall,  who  edited  The  Irving  Shakespeare,  at  their  house 


A   PLEASANT    REMEMBRANCE 


75 


in  Bloomsbury  Square.     An  absolute  loss  of  memory  put 
an  end  to  her  career  on  the  stage. 

She  was  the  last  of  that  group  of  my  theatrical  acquaint- 
ances. I  had  spent  many  pleasant  hours  in  their  company, 
and  there  was  not  an  hour  that  one  of  us  had  reason  to 
regret  or  be  ashamed  of. 


CHAPTER   IX 

EARLY  DAYS  AT  THE   BAR  I     1864-1866 

MY  first  business  when  I  was  a  full-blown  barrister  was 
to  put  my  name  on  a  door  in  the  Temple  where  briefs  might 
find  me.  In  my  choice  of  chambers  I  was  not  very  wise.  I 
still  slept  and  did  my  newspaper  work  at  Moorgate  Street, 
but  since  1862,  when  I  became  an  Associate  of  King's  College, 
I  had  no  classes  to  occupy  my  evenings,  and  after  April  1863 
I  saw  a  great  deal  of  the  convivial  side  of  student  life  in 
the  Temple.  There  was  very  much  more  of  this  forty 
years  ago  than  there  is  to-day  ;  a  good  many  men  lived  in 
chambers,  and  wine  parties  were  frequent.  Every  call  day 
there  would  be  two  or  three  such  parties,  and  students  and 
young  barristers  wandered  from  one  to  another,  every- 
where welcome  and  everywhere  noisy.  It  was  a  merry 
crowd,  but  very  few  of  those  who  joined  it  made  any 
position  for  themselves  in  later  years.  The  young  Irish- 
men were  the  life  and  soul  of  all  these  parties,  and  to  them, 
almost  without  exception,  the  habits  then  formed  were 
fatal.  I  could  set  down  the  names  of  eight  young  Irishmen, 
all  of  high  promise,  who  were  students,  or  barristers  lately 
called,  in  1863  and  1864,  and  who  all  were  ruined  by  drink. 
I  spent  one  long  night  sitting  alone  by  the  bedside  of  a  man 
of  brilliant  gifts  who  was  raving  in  the  horrors  of  delirium 
tremens. 

He,  indeed,  survived  and  went  back  to  Ireland  with 
shattered  health  to  fill  for  a  few  years  (he  died  long  ago)  a 
professorship  at  Trinity  College  ;  but  the  other  seven  simply 
disappeared.  Richard  Whitfield  was  not  one  of  the  seven, 
but  his  career  was  spoiled  by  these  convivial  habits.  He 

76 


1864-6]  AT    3,    PUMP   COURT  77 

was  a  delightful  companion,  full  of  fun  and  humour,  who 
could  do  almost  anything  except  devote  himself  to  con- 
tinuous work.  The  kindest-hearted  and  most  generous  of 
men,  he  would  spend  or  lend  or  give  when  he  had  money 
to  do  it  with,  but  to  keep  a  five-pound  note  by  him  for  a 
week  or  two  was  quite  beyond  his  power.  I  saw  his  likeness 
on  the  stage  in  my  friend  Edward  Terry's  delightful  per- 
formance of  Dick  Phenyl,  in  Sweet  Lavender. 

He  lived  in  rooms  at  the  top  of  Number  3,  Pump  Court, 
and  I  paid  him  a  few  pounds  for  being  allowed  to  put  my 
name  on  the  door,  and  to  speak  of  a  small  boy,  who  used  to 
cook  eggs  and  bacon  and  make  water  hot  for  shaving  and 
other  purposes,  as  my  clerk.  I  was  not  there  long,  for  the 
rooms  were  too  far  up  for  business,  and  their  general  con- 
dition and  appearance  would  not  have  inspired  confidence 
in  the  most  indulgent  of  clients.  So  I  soon  moved  to  very 
different  quarters  at  3,  Garden  Court,  where  in  an  excellent 
set  of  rooms  on  the  ground-floor  my  dear  friend  Edward 
Pinches  and  I  began  a  joint  occupation  of  chambers  which 
there  and  afterwards  at  5,  Essex  Court  and  more  lately  at 
2,  Essex  Court  lasted  for  more  than  forty  years. 

But  I  did  not  spend  much  time  at  Chambers.  When  I 
read  it  was  generally  at  Lincoln's  Inn  Library,  but  for  the 
most  part  my  days  were  spent  in  Court. 

By  a  curious  provision  in  the  will  of  Christopher  Tancred 
the  students  were  required  to  become  members  of  Lincoln's 
Inn,  but  to  declare  their  intention  of  practising  at  the 
Common  Law  Bar.  But  apart  from  that  obligation  I  should 
certainly  have  chosen  the  more  active  and  public  branch 
of  legal  work,  and  there  was  no  question  as  to  which  circuit 
I  should  join. 

I  had,  indeed,  thought  I  should  like  to  go  the  Western 
Circuit,  partly  from  my  family  connection  with  Somerset- 
shire, and  partly  because  the  names  of  Cockburn,  Coleridge, 
and  Karslake  had  made  that  circuit  pre-eminent,  but  to  do 
so  would  cost  me  £150  a  year  in  circuit  expenses,  and  that, 
of  course,  I  could  not  afford.  The  Home  Circuit  and  a 
London  Sessions  were  clearly  the  proper  places  for  a  young 


78  EARLY   DAYS   AT   THE    BAR          [CHAP,  ix 

barrister  with  no  money  to  spare,  so  I  applied  for  admission 
to  the  mess  of  the  Surrey  Sessions  which  generally  sat 
at  Newington.  I  had  an  odd  difficulty  at  first.  My 
staunch  friend  W.  R.  Stevens  was  clerk  in  the  office  of 
Mr.  Freeland,  the  solicitor  to  the  South  Eastern  Railway 
Company,  and  directly  my  call  was  announced  in  the  papers 
he  procured  a  small  brief  which  he  sent  me  to  prosecute  at 
the  Surrey  Sessions  some  servant  of  the  Company  who  had 
been  detected  in  theft. 

I  was  not  yet  a  member  of  the  Sessions  or  of  the  Home 
Circuit.  But  the  members  of  the  Sessions  Mess  thought  it 
would  be  too  cruel  to  make  me  return  my  first  brief,  so 
within  a  week  or  two  of  my  call  I  found  myself  conducting 
the  earliest  of  my  long  series  of  criminal  cases.  The  Surrey 
Sessions  of  that  day  was  rather  a  curious  place.  There  was 
a  looseness  of  professional  conduct  and  a  violence  and 
grossness  of  cross-examination  and  speech  which  would  not 
now  be  tolerated.  The  leader  of  the  Sessions  Bar  was  a 
singular  person.  Samuel  Lilley  was  an  Oxford  graduate 
of  some  distinction,  who  was,  I  believe,  a  good  Hebrew 
scholar  and  had  been  meant  for  the  clerical  office.  His 
brother  the  Rev.  Isaac  Lilley  was  rector  of  St.  Chrysostom's, 
High  Street,  Peckham,  the  church  where  Mrs.  Platt  rented 
sittings  in  the  very  early  days  of  my  visits  to  the  Peckham 
Park  Road.  But  he  turned  to  the  Bar,  and  rather  late  in 
life  obtained,  by  seniority  rather  than  capacity,  the  lead  of 
the  Surrey  Sessions.  He  had  no  clerk,  and  although  his 
name  was  on  a  door  in  Middle  Temple  Lane,  he  was  seldom 
seen  at  the  Temple.  He  lived  at  Peckham,  and  while  his 
clients  in  criminal  cases  would  generally  seek  him  there, 
his  most  lucrative  business,  that  of  applying  for  or  opposing 
the  grant  of  new  public-house  licences,  was  negotiated  at 
the  beer-shop  whose  occupier  was  applying,  or  the  public 
house  which  was  opposing  the  application.  He  had  a 
powerful  voice,  a  stormy  manner,  and  a  ferocity  in  assailing 
an  unfortunate  witness  which  I  have  never  seen  equalled 
elsewhere.  When  I  add  the  little  detail  that  he  always  had 
a  spare  watch  in  his  pocket  in  a  little  leather  bag,  and  would 


1864-6]  THE   SURREY    SESSIONS  79 

casually  mention  that  he  carried  it  for  sale  I  have  completed 
the  description.  We  were  never  on  very  friendly  terms, 
for  he  was  naturally  jealous  of  any  junior  who  threatened 
to  interfere  with  his  business,  and  he  was  not  over-scrupulous 
in  his  methods  of  opposition.  My  principal  friends  at  the 
Sessions  were  Morgan  Howard,  a  very  able  man  with  whom 
there  was  a  bond  of  sympathy,  for  he  had  come  to  the  Bar 
from  Henry  Peek's  tea  warehouse  in  East  cheap,  and  (a 
little  later)  my  dear  friend  Douglas  Straight,  a  brilliant 
advocate,  the  most  genial  of  companions,  and  the  most 
loyal  of  friends.  He  and  I  tried  to  make  the  Surrey  Sessions 
pleasant  for  each  other,  and  I  think  with  much  success. 

It  seemed  to  me  that  my  best  chance  of  getting  work 
early  would  be  at  the  Surrey  Sessions,  so  I  made  it  a  rule 
to  attend  there  regularly  and  stay  in  Court  during  the  whole 
day  whether  I  had  a  brief  or  not.  When  there  was  no  sitting 
at  Newington  I  would  go  in  the  same  way  to  the  Central 
Criminal  Court.  When  that  was  not  sitting  I  would,  in  the 
same  regular  way,  attend  the  hearing  of  causes  at  West- 
minster Hall,  going  chiefly  into  the  Courts  where  Common 
Jury  cases  were  being  tried. 

One  of  my  rules,  and  perhaps  the  most  valuable  (I  have 
tried  to  observe  it  throughout  my  career),  was  to  be  in  Court 
five  minutes  before  the  Judge  took  his  seat. 

At  that  day  the  practice  was  for  leaders  in  the  very 
front  rank  to  take  almost  any  brief  that  was  offered,  even 
with  very  small  fees.  At  the  very  height  of  their  great 
success  Huddleston  and  Day  would  take  ten-guinea  or 
seven-guinea  briefs,  and  would  often  have  eight  or  ten  cases 
in  the  day's  list.  They  kept  at  work  all  day,  and  gave  all 
the  attention  they  could  to  the  cases  which  seemed  to  want 
it  most,  but  it  was  a  thoroughly  bad  system,  the  labour 
of  the  Counsel  was  enormous,  and  the  dissatisfaction  of  the 
suitor  often  very  great.  But  one  result  of  the  system  was 
that  clients  had  to  be  careful  in  choosing  juniors  who  could 
conduct  the  case,  and  another  was  that  at  the  beginning  of 
the  day  the  clerks  of  these  overworked  Q.C/s  were  going 
into  Court  looking  for  a  trustworthy  junior  to  take  notes 


8o  EARLY   DAYS   AT   THE   BAR          [CHAP,  ix 

for  the  great  man  to  use  if  he  should  happen  to  come  in. 
Often  the  leader  would  come  in,  snub  the  junior  who  was 
doing  his  best,  dash  into  the  middle  of  the  case,  ask  a 
few  trivial  and  generally  mischievous  questions,  and  then 
flourish  out  again  to  treat  some  other  client  in  the  same 
way  in  the  next  Court. 

The  modern  practice  of  giving  a  leader  a  large  fee  upon 
the  understanding  that  he  will  attend  to  the  case  throughout 
is  obviously  much  better  both  for  suitors  and  for  the  Bar. 

My  other  rule  was  to  take  great  pains  with  the  hand- 
writing of  my  notes.  They  were  for  another  person  to  use, 
and  their  being  easily  read  was  as  important  as  their  being 
correct.  I  soon  became  known  as  a  note-taker  who  could 
be  trusted,  and  seldom  sat  unoccupied  in  Court.  If  there 
were  nothing  else  to  do  I  would  take  down  the  names  of  cases 
cited,  and  note  the  legal  points  made  in  speeches  or  in  the 
summing  up.  Of  course  my  shorthand  was  of  great  value. 

At  the  Central  Criminal  Court  my  diligence  was  soon 
rewarded.  One  day  a  man  was  being  tried  before  Mr. 
Justice  Lush  who  had  driven  over  and  killed  a  child  and  was 
charged  with  manslaughter. 

Sergeant  Sleigh  defended,  and  had  for  his  junior,  Daly,  a 
man  then  in  good  business  at  the  Criminal  Bar,  who  was 
often  glad  to  get  some  one  to  take  notes  for  him.  I  was 
doing  this,  and  in  the  course  of  the  afternoon  Daly  slipped 
out  of  Court.  Presently  Sleigh  asked  a  foolish  question. 
He  said  to  a  witness  who  was  describing  the  prisoner's 
driving,  "  Why,  you  must  have  thought  he  was  drunk." 
"  I  am  sure  he  was,"  said  the  witness,  and  Sleigh,  furious 
at  his  own  blunder,  turned  round  to  speak  to  Daly.  I 
hastily  explained  that  he  had  gone  away,  and  Sleigh  with 
an  oath  flung  out  of  Court.  Presently  the  speech  for  the 
defence  had  to  be  made,  and  neither  Counsel  was  there.  The 
Judge  was  very  kind,  asked  me  to  address  the  jury,  and 
bespoke  for  me  their  indulgent  hearing. 

I  did  my  best,  and  the  jury,  after  an  hour  or  so  of  dis- 
cussion, gave  a  verdict  of  not  guilty. 1   At  that  time  it  was  the 
1  Reg.  v.  Gibson,  C.C.  papers,  64,  552. 


1864-6]  THE   OLD    BAILEY  81 

custom  for  the  two  Judges  and  some  of  the  Counsel  to  dine 
with  the  Sheriffs  in  the  large  room  at  the  Old  Bailey  at 
5  o'clock  on  Wednesday,  and  I  think  on  Friday.  This  was 
one  of  the  dinner  days,  and  the  Sheriffs  invited  me.  The 
Judges  said  complimentary  and  encouraging  things,  and 
so  I  was  well  started  in  my  career  in  that  great  school  of 
advocacy.  I  should  like  here  to  sketch  the  two  men  who 
at  that  time  were  the  unquestioned  leaders  of  the  Criminal 
Bar,  and  to  do  so  is  not  to  break  in  upon  the  story  of  my 
life,  because  it  was  by  watching  their  methods  and  studying 
the  causes  of  their  success  that  I  trained  myself  for  the 
work  of  later  years. 

William  Ballantine,  "  the  Serjeant,"  was  a  man  of  re- 
markable power.  Rather  over  middle  height,  lean  and  hard, 
with  the  eye  of  a  hawk.  A  voice  capable  of  many  tones, 
but  with  a  curious  drawl,  half  infirmity  and  half  affectation. 
A  man  of  slight  legal  knowledge,  of  idle  and  pleasure- loving 
habits,  but  an  advocate  of  quite  extraordinary  skill.  He 
could  rise  to  great  eloquence,  but  his  great  power  was  in  his 
cross-examination,  which  was  the  most  subtle  and  deadly 
that  I  ever  heard.  There  was  a  great  fascination  about 
him ;  whenever  he  was  in  Court  he  was  the  most  conspicuous 
person  there,  and  seemed  by  instinct  to  lead  or  coerce  or 
dominate  judge  and  witness  and  jury.  His  temper  was 
violent,  his  humour  bitter  and  sarcastic,  but  he  was  the 
most  generous  of  leaders.  Once  at  Kingston,  before  Sir 
Alexander  Cockburn,  in  a  South  Eastern  Railway  case 
which  he  had  not  read  I  was  rather  importunate  in  my 
suggestions,  and  he  turned  on  me  in  Court  with  "  Damn  you, 
sir,  am  I  conducting  this  case  or  are  you  ?  "  But  before 
the  trial  was  over  he  explained  to  the  Jury  that  I  had  been 
right,  and  had  only  been  reminding  him  of  facts  which  he 
ought  to  have  known. 

I  have  often  heard  him  when  quoting  cases  mention  his 
junior's  name,  and  say  he  was  indebted  to  his  diligence. 
His  career  was  finally  spoiled  by  his  visit  to  India  to  defend 
the  Gaekwar  of  Baroda,  and  the  latter  part  of  his  life  was 
spent  in  exile  at  Boulogne,  only  being  saved  from  poverty 


82  EARLY    DAYS    AT   THE    BAR  [CHAP,  ix 

by  the  allowance  made  him  by  his  son,  which  was  generously 
supplemented  by  six  members  of  the  Bar. 

One  of  the  six  was  his  frequent  opponent  in  Court,  the 
other  leader  I  wish  to  describe,  Hardinge  Giffard,  a  man  of 
very  different  stamp.  Short  of  stature,  not  distinguished 
in  appearance  or  manner,  with  a  voice  which  though  loud 
and  clear  was  somewhat  harsh  and  had  no  persuasive  tones 
in  it,  Giffard  was  by  his  industry  (I  am  speaking  of  his  early 
years  in  silk),  by  his  great  knowledge  of  law,  his  strong 
masculine  sense,  his  indomitable  courage,  and  his  excellence 
in  the  art  of  arranging  and  narrating  facts,  one  of  the  most 
formidable  of  advocates.  His  scrupulous  and  absolute 
fairness  gave  him  great  influence  with  juries,  and  his  reply 
in  a  criminal  case  was  always  worthy  of  study  and  imitation. 
Closely  associated  with  him  as  I  was  for  many  years  I  have 
not  seen  much  of  him  in  private  life  since  he  became  Lord 
Chancellor,  but  it  has  been  pleasant  to  see  my  old  friend 
and  companion  develop  into  the  greatest  judge  before 
whom  I  ever  practised. 

It  was  through  his  advice  that  I  did  not  let  slip  my  first 
opportunity  of  addressing  a  court  in  bane. 

The  opportunity  came  in  a  remarkable  way  ! 

Very  soon  after  my  call  to  the  Bar,  I  think  within  a  week 
or  two,  I  heard  that  a  debate  was  to  be  opened  at  the 
"  Socials  "  debating  society  by  a  young  Irishman  named 
Hans  Morrison,  who  had  lately  caused  a  great  sensation  in 
Dublin  by  the  brilliancy  and  boldness  of  an  address  de- 
livered to  the  Historical  Society.  The  "  Socials  "  was  a 
popular  debating  society  which  met  weekly  at  the  Rainbow 
Tavern,  and  had  a  larger  gathering  than  the  Hardwicke,  as 
it  was  not  limited  to  members  of  the  Inns  of  Court. 

I  did  not  belong  to  it,  but  a  friend  (I  think  Harry  Atkinson, 
now  Judge  Atkinson)  took  me  as  a  visitor. 

There  was  a  crowded  room,  but  just  at  the  time  for  begin- 
ning the  debate  a  letter  came  to  say  that  Morrison  was 
unwell  and  could  not  attend.  The  subject  announced  was 
a  speech  on  the  Parliamentary  Franchise  which  had  been 
lately  made  by  Mr.  Gladstone,  and  was  known  as  the  "  flesh 


1864-6]  A   WELL-REWARDED    SPEECH  83 

and  blood  "  speech.  The  committee  tried  to  find  among 
their  own  members  a  substitute  for  the  absent  opener, 
and  failing  in  this,  asked  me  if  I  would  open  the  debate. 
Stipulating  for  five  minutes  in  which  to  arrange  a  few  notes, 
I  consented.  The  debate  was  well  sustained,  and  Digby 
Seymour,  then  one  of  the  most  popular  leaders  at  the  Bar, 
spoke  in  the  course  of  it  and  said  very  kind  things  about  me ; 
and  after  my  reply,  which  naturally  was  a  good  deal  better 
than  the  opening,  I  went  away  well  pleased  with  my  evening. 

It  so  happened  that  there  was  present  a  Mr.  John  P. 
Murrough,  a  London  solicitor  who  had  been  for  a  short  time 
Member  of  Parliament  for  Bridport.  He  stayed  after  the 
debate  to  sup  with  some  friends,  and  declared  that  after 
what  he  had  heard  that  night  he  would  give  to  me  the  first 
junior  brief  he  had  at  his  disposal.  That  brief  was  an 
important  one. 

Charles  Windsor,  a  cashier  in  a  New  York  bank,  had 
stolen  a  very  large  sum  of  money,  and  escaped  with  it  to 
England,  having  managed  to  conceal  the  fraud  by  making 
false  entries  in  the  books  of  the  bank. 

A  warrant  was  issued  for  his  extradition  on  a  charge  of 
forgery,  which  was  included  in  the  Ashburton  Treaty  of  1842. 

But  a  writ  of  habeas  corpus  was  obtained,  and  the  point 
was  taken  that  this  crime  was  not  forgery,  the  false  making 
of  a  writing  which  purported  to  be  the  writing  of  another 
person,  and  that  it  was  not  within  the  treaty.  McMahon  led 
for  the  prisoner,  and  Murrough,  true  to  his  word,  sent  me 
the  junior  brief.  Giffard  was  on  the  other  side.  The  case 
was  argued  on  April  27th,  1865,  before  Lord  Chief  Justice 
Cockburn  and  Mr.  Justice  Blackburn  and  Mr.  Justice  Shee. 

When  McMahon  had  finished  I  thought  he  had  said  all 
that  was  needed,  and  told  Giffard  I  did  not  propose  to  add 
anything. 

"  Nonsense,"  said  he,  "  you  give  them  an  argument ; 
it  will  do  you  good.  You  want  the  judges  to  know  you, 
and  you  want  to  get  used  to  hearing  your  own  voice  in  the 
Courts."  So  I  for  the  first  time  addressed  the  Court  in 
bane.  We  succeeded,  and  Charles  Windsor  was  released. 


84  EARLY    DAYS    AT   THE    BAR         [CHAP,  ix 

The  delivery  of  this  brief,  although  I  did  not  know  of  what 
enormous  importance  to  my  career  the  case  was  destined  to 
be,  gave  me  great  hope  and  confidence  as  to  the  future,  and 
one  way  in  which  that  confidence  expressed  itself  was  in  a 
resolve  again  to  approach  Annie  Mitchell. 

For  two  years  I  had  not  seen  her,  but  I  had  heard  of 
her  from  time  to  time  ;  that  her  life  continued  its  uneventful 
course,  that  she  was  not  married,  and  that  it  was  not  believed 
that  any  one  had  taken  my  place. 

My  own  mind  had  never  changed  or  wavered ;  and  on 
Sunday,  April  23rd,  1865,  two  years  to  the  day  since  we 
parted,  I  went  to  Gloucester  Cottages  in  the  afternoon  and 
asked  to  see  her.  She  had  gone  with  a  friend,  a  Miss  J  essopp, 
for  a  walk,  which  was  a  favourite  one  of  hers,  to  the  pretty 
country  cemetery  at  Nunhead.  I  followed  and  found  them, 
and  then  I  walked  back  to  her  home ;  went  with  her  in 
the  evening,  as  of  old,  to  Camden  Church,  and  before  we 
parted  that  night  the  cloud  had  passed  away  in  a  happy 
reconciliation ;  and  from  that  day  it  was  my  happiness  to 
enjoy  for  the  sixteen  years  for  which  her  life  lasted  her  fond 
and  unselfish  and  indulgent  affection. 

So  there  came  back  upon  my  life  and  character  the 
strongest  of  all  the  influences  which  elevate  and  restrain — 
the  habitual  companionship  of  a  pure  and  sweet  woman 
and  the  contemplation  of  marriage  with  her.  It  had  not 
been  long  enough  withdrawn  for  me  to  fall  into  irreparable 
mischief.  But  it  would  have  been  better  for  me  if  it  had 
never  been  withdrawn  at  all. 

My  life  would  have  been  better  ;  my  conscience  clearer  ; 
my  memories  less  clouded.  I  think  a  man  should  always 
marry  before  he  is  twenty-six  years  old  ;  if  his  marriage  is 
so  late  as  that  it  is  well  for  him  if  it  be  preceded  by  two  or 
three  years  of  betrothal. 

It  was  about  this  time  that  I  was  relieved  from  the  heavy 
burden  of  my  work  for  The  Morning  Herald  and  Standard. 

I  still  held  to  my  rule  of  never  touching  it  until  the 
evening,  and  the  consequence  was  that  I  was  often  working 
far  into  the  night,  and  was  hardly  fit  for  early  attendance 


1864-6]  I   LEAVE  THE  NEWSPAPERS  85 

at  Court  in  the  morning.  And  I  had  for  some  time  felt 
aggrieved  by  the  refusal  of  Mr.  Johnstone  to  increase  my 
weekly  stipend.  The  concession  made  to  me  was  that 
something  less  than  four  columns  a  week  would  be  con- 
sidered sufficient.  But  of  course  this  arrangement  was 
indefinite  and  not  very  satisfactory,  and  there  was  some 
occasional  friction. 

While  I  was  hesitating  to  sacrifice  an  income  so  important 
to  me  an  accident  occurred  which  settled  the  question.  One 
day  in  the  parcel  of  books  sent  me  for  review  there  was  a 
novel  called  Blount  Tempest,  by  the  Rev.  John  Montes- 
quieu Bellew,  a  popular  preacher,  but  noted  rather  as  an 
elocutionist  than  as  a  divine.  I  thought  the  book  was 
rubbish,  and  I  said  so  in  an  article  which  was  promptly  sent 
back  with  an  angry  letter  from  Captain  Hamber,  the  editor. 

He  said  he  had  written  specially  to  me  to  ask  for  a  favour- 
able review,  as  the  author  was  a  friend  of  his  (I  had  not 
received  any  such  letter),  and  asked  me  to  write  another 
notice.  I  replied  as  angrily,  and  absolutely  refused  to  write 
anything  but  condemnation  of  what  I  thought  a  worthless 
book.  Some  severe  criticisms  of  mine  had  not  been  pub- 
lished, but  no  attempt  had  ever  been  made  before  this  time 
to  interfere  with  the  free  expression  of  my  opinion  upon  the 
works  sent  me  for  review.  The  natural  result,  not  un- 
welcome to  me,  although  I  should  have  preferred  its  coming 
about  in  a  more  friendly  fashion,  was  that  I  ceased  to  be  a 
member  of  the  staff  of  the  newspapers. 

The  case  of  Charles  Windsor  now  had  a  new  development. 
The  New  York  bank  brought  a  civil  action  against  him 
claiming  the  return  of  the  moneys  he  had  taken.  I  forget 
how  it  was  that  the  proceedings  in  the  action  were  expedited 
but  they  must  have  been,  for  the  case  came  into  the  list  for 
trial  before  Lord  Chief  Justice  Cockburn  at  the  Guildhall  of 
the  City  of  London  on  July  I2th,  1865.  Very  unusual  cir- 
cumstances combined  to  give  me  the  opportunity  I  am  now 
about  to  describe.  The  case  did  not  come  into  the  list 
until  the  last  day  but  one  of  the  London  sittings,  when  some 
of  the  country  circuits  were  beginning.  And  Parliament 

7 


86  EARLY   DAYS   AT   THE   BAR          [CHAP,  ix 

had  been  dissolved  on  July  7th,  and  the  borough  elections 
were  to  begin  on  the  loth.  I  was  third  Counsel 
for  the  defendant,  Edward  James  having  the  leading 
brief,  and  Patrick  McMahon,  an  experienced  junior,  being 
second. 

A  few  days  before  the  case  came  on  Edward  James 
returned  his  brief  to  go  and  stand  for  Manchester. 

Digby  Seymour  was  put  in  his  place.  A  day  or  two  later 
Digby  Seymour  went  away  to  fight  Southampton.  Sergeant 
O'Malley  now  became  leader. 

On  the  very  day  before  the  case  came  into  the  list  O'Malley 
was  called  away  to  his  work  on  circuit,  and  McMahon  went 
over  to  Ireland  to  contest  the  seat  at  Wexford.  So  when 
on  the  morning  of  July  I2th  the  case  was  called  on,  Sir 
John  Karslake,  Henry  James,  and  Joseph  Brown  were  there 
appearing  for  the  plaintiffs,  and  I  alone  represented  the 
defendant.  I  made  an  unavailing  application  for  delay, 
and  then  the  case  went  on.  I  did  the  best  I  could  in  cross- 
examining  the  witnesses,  and  at  about  half-past  three  in 
the  afternoon  the  case  for  the  plaintiffs  closed.  The  Lord 
Chief  Justice  asked  if  I  would  like  to  address  the  jury,  or 
have  an  adjournment  to  the  next  morning.  "  Whichever 
is  most  convenient  to  your  Lordship."  "  No,  Mr.  Clarke," 
said  he,  "I  want  you  to  do  just  what  you  prefer." 
"  Then,  my  Lord,"  I  said,  "  I  should  like  to  put  my  case  to 
the  jury  before  they  go  away."  He  was  delighted,  and 
listened  attentively  to  my  speech,  and  once  or  twice  inter- 
posed with  encouraging  and  helpful  comment.  The  next 
day  I  called  witnesses  and  spoke  again.  I  could  not  win 
the  verdict,  but  Sir  John  Karslake  in  his  reply  complimented 
me  on  the  ability  I  had  displayed  in  the  defence,  saying 
that  not  only  had  I  displayed  great  ability,  but  had  also 
shown  in  a  remarkable  degree  the  qualities  of  courage  and 
discretion.  And  Cockburn  was  generous  in  his  praise. 

There  was  another  friend  to  me  in  Court  more  powerful 
than  either  Cockburn  or  Karslake — The  Times  reporter. 
William  Finlaison  ("Old  Fin"  as  he  was  affectionately 
called)  was  the  prince  of  reporters,  and  a  lawyer  of  great 


1864-6]  EXTRADITION  87 

learning,  and  was  always  looking  out  for  opportunities  of 
helping  any  young  Counsel  who  seemed  to  be  doing  his 
work  well. 

He  reported  in  full  the  kind  sayings  of  Judge  and  Counsel, 
and  I  found  myself,  only  eight  months  after  my  call  to  the 
Bar,  suddenly,  and  by  this  extraordinary  series  of  unexpected 
events,  brought  prominently  into  professional  and  public 
notice. 

Truly  my  speech  at  the  "  Socials  "  was  having  a  great 
reward. 

A  few  months  later  there  was  another  notable  extradition 
case,  which  naturally  came  to  me. 

The  questions  involved  in  the  case  of  Charles  Coppin  were 
not  of  great  importance,  but  again  I  was  found  arguing, 
this  time  before  Lord  Chelmsiord,  with  Sir  John  Rolt,  the 
Attorney-General,  and  Hannen  against  me,  and  again, 
though  not  successful  in  my  contention,  my  position  at  the 
Bar  was  improved,  and  briefs  came  in  with  pleasant  fre- 
quency. In  my  first  year  I  earned  one  hundred  guineas ; 
and  in  my  second  just  double  that  amount. 

These  two  cases  had  made  me  very  familiar  with  the 
law  of  extradition.  I  had  not  contented  myself  with 
looking  up  the  authorities  which  required  to  be  consulted 
in  the  cases,  but  had  read  much  and  made  very  copious 
notes  upon  the  general  subject  of  the  surrender  of  criminals 
in  ancient  and  modern  times. 

So  I  resolved  to  devote  the  greater  part  of  the  long 
vacation  to  writing  a  little  book  on  Extradition. 

I  had  much  encouragement  from  Messrs.  Stevens  & 
Haynes,  who  agreed  to  publish  it  and  to  give  me  £50  for  the 
copyright  of  the  first  edition.  So  I  set  to  work  at  the 
Lincoln's  Inn  Library,  and  in  six  weeks  completed  the  manu- 
script. I  felt  myself  handsomely  paid  by  the  £50,  but 
I  did  not  know  how  much  the  book  would  bring  me  in  credit 
and  in  fees.  A  second  edition  was  wanted  in  1874,  a  third 
came  out  in  1888,  and  a  fourth  in  1903,  and  I  can  count 
at  least  half-a-dozen  interesting  and  important  cases  which 
came  to  me  because  I  was  known  as  the  author  of  this  work. 


88  EARLY   DAYS   AT   THE   BAR          [CHAP.  IX 

I  was  now  fairly  sure  of  the  modest  income  upon  which 
we  could  venture  to  marry,  and  we  had  begun  to  talk  of 
our  plans  when  at  the  beginning  of  October  Mrs.  Platt  died 
at  the  ripe  age  of  ninety-two.  The  only  difficulty,  that  of 
Annie's  reluctance  to  leave  her  grandmother,  had  now  dis- 
appeared ;  a  sum  of  £200  which  came  to  her  as  a  legacy 
sufficed  to  refurnish  the  little  house  in  which  she  wished 
still  to  live  ;  and  an  income  left  to  her  of  about  £60  a  year 
was  a  useful  addition  to  what  I  was  earning.  So  on  the 
morning  of  December  29th,  1866,  I  left  my  room  at  Moor- 
gate  Street  and  drove  over  to  St.  Giles,  Camberwell,  where 
Annie  Mitchell  and  I  were  married. 


CHAPTER   X 

EARLY  YEARS   OF  MARRIAGE  !     1866-1873 

WE  went  down  to  Hastings  on  our  wedding-day  and  stayed 
until  Monday  at  the  Queen's  Hotel.  But  that  was  much 
too  expensive  to  be  our  home  for  more  than  a  couple  of  days, 
and  we  took  two  rooms  in  a  tiny  little  house  in  the  older 
part  of  Hastings,  and  there  spent  the  fortnight  which  we 
allowed  ourselves  for  our  honeymoon. 

Coming  back  to  town  we  found  our  little  home  looking 
fresh  and  bright,  and  found  my  father  putting  on  the 
drawing-room  mantel-shelf  his  wedding  gift,  one  of  my  old 
shop  friends,  an  ormolu  clock,  which,  with  new  red  chenille 
round  the  glass,  was  for  years  the  brightest  ornament  in  the 
house.  In  this  dear  little  home  we  spent  seven  years  of 
happy  wedded  life.  It  was  indeed  very  small ;  there  were 
only  seven  rooms,  and  £33  a  year  was  the  modest  rent ; 
but  it  was  not  too  small  to  hold  a  great  deal  of  happiness. 
The  Peckham  Park  Road  was  not  then  a  mere  lane  through 
a  wilderness  of  bricks  and  mortar.  Number  12,  Gloucester 
Cottages,  was  a  neat  little  semi-detached  cottage,  with  its 
long  garden  at  the  back,  and  a  grass- covered  enclosure  in 
front.  A  fine  jasmine  flourished  on  the  front  walls. 

"  Oh  !  the  faint  sweet  smell  of  that  jasmine  flower,"  it 
seems  to  have  scented  my  whole  life ;  and  from  the  windows 
one  looked  over  a  few  acres  of  market  gardens  which  stretched 
away  southwards  towards  the  Old  Kent  Road.  We  had 
only  one  servant,  but  we  had  books  and  music,  and  when  I 
came  home  to  tea  and  to  a  long  evening  in  the  dear  com- 
panionship to  which  I  had  looked  forward  for  nine  years,  I 
was  as  happy  as  it  was  possible  for  a  man  to  be. 

89 


go  EARLY    YEARS    OF    MARRIAGE       [CHAP,  x 

One  evening  in  the  week  we  gave  to  the  Choral  Society 
(where,  by  the  by,  Rose  Her  see  was  a  fellow  member) ;  on 
Saturday  evening  there  was  a  whist  party  and  bread-and- 
cheese  supper  at  the  house  of  some  member  of  our  little 
friendly  whist  club,  and  now  and  then  we  went  to  the  theatre, 
or  to  a  concert,  or  walked  by  pleasant  country  lanes  to  the 
Crystal  Palace  at  Sydenham.  Of  course  there  had  to  be 
very  strict  economy.  I  gave  the  wife  £2  los.  a  week  for 
housekeeping,  and  not  much  was  spent  in  dress,  or  wine, 
or  travelling.  I  used  to  walk  to  the  Temple  and  back  unless 
the  weather  quite  forbade  it,  and  my  midday  meal  was  not 
costly,  though  it  had  to  be  substantial.  Had  I  been  brought 
up  in  the  easy  life  of  abundant  means  I  dare  say  I  should 
have  felt  this  enforced  economy  to  be  a  hardship ;  as  it 
was,  with  health,  and  love,  and  ambition,  and  the  feeling 
that  every  month  was  seeing  some  progress  made,  some 
burden  being  lightened,  some  little  pleasure  or  comfort 
added  to  one's  surroundings,  I  was  thoroughly  happy.  I 
always  look  upon  that  early  marriage,  narrow  as  our  means 
were,  as  the  wisest  act  for  which  I  ever  made  myself  re- 
sponsible. 

I  kept  up  my  attendance  at  the  Hardwicke  Society  ;  and 
I  still  went  from  time  to  time  to  the  House  of  Commons, 
but  my  order  of  admission  was  not  renewed  after  the  Session 
of  1867. 

So  the  summer  of  1867  passed.  My  business  was  gradu- 
ally increasing.  My  accounts  for  1866  had  shown  a  booking 
of  fees  to  an  amount  of  240  guineas,  but  I  do  not  think  I 
received  them  all ;  at  all  events,  they  were  not  paid  directly 
they  were  earned.  One  addition  to  my  various  interests 
may  be  mentioned.  In  the  course  of  my  work  with  Working 
Men's  Clubs  I  had  often  been  told  that  one  very  serious 
difficulty  for  working  men  was  that  the  local  tradesmen 
insisted  as  far  as  they  could  upon  the  wives  taking  credit. 
If  a  new  customer  came  to  the  shop  they  would  beg  her  to 
let  them  send  in  a  weekly  bill.  The  bill  would  not  be  sent, 
the  wife  would  spend  the  money  on  something  else,  and 
when  there  was  a  debt  for  two  or  three  weeks'  supplies  the 


; 


866-73]  HOME   ANXIETY  91 


poor  woman  dared  not  grumble  or  go  elsewhere,  and  had 
to  take  what  the  tradesman  liked  to  supply,  and  very 
much  at  his  own  prices,  because  she  could  not  face  confessing 
to  the  husband  how  much  she  owed. 

At  Peckham  the  working  men  complained  bitterly,  so  I 
started  a  co-operative  society  of  which  I  was  Treasurer  and 
general  organiser.  There  are  lying  before  me  as  I  write  the 
book  of  rules  and  a  copy  of  the  notice  which  called  a  meeting 
for  the  purpose  of  establishing  the  Society. 

For  a  time  the  Society  was  a  success,  but  I  soon  found 
that  the  work  and  the  troubles  of  the  management  were 
more  than  I  could  sustain,  and  a  few  months  after  I  ceased 
to  control  it  the  Society  came  to  an  end.  One  of  my  great 
regrets  is  that  I  have  never  been  able  to  do  anything  to  put 
an  end  to  the  abominable  system  of  imprisonment  for  small 
debts  (and  for  small  debts  only)  which  disgraces  our  laws 
and  is  the  cause  of  many  mischiefs. 

In  the  autumn  of  1867  all  seemed  going  well  with  us. 

My  fee  book  showed  an  increase ;  my  dear  little  wife 
and  I  were  in  the  best  of  health  and  as  happy  as  a  young 
husband  and  wife  could  be,  and  were  looking  forward  to 
the  event  which  would  make  the  joy  of  our  home  complete  ; 
and  in  the  Long  Vacation  we  had  a  delightful  holiday  with 
some  good  friends  at  Petersfield. 

All  these  bright  hopes  were  suddenly  clouded.  One 
evening  I  returned  to  my  little  home  to  find  that  the  wife 
had  been  suddenly  taken  ill  and  had  had  a  succession  of 
alarming  fits. 

Her  married  cousin  had  been  sent  for  and  had  summoned 
the  doctor,  and  he,  when  I  saw  him,  was  in  much  anxiety. 
He  suggested  calling  in  a  physician,  and  recommended  a 
young  doctor  at  St.  Thomas's  Hospital — Henry  Gervis  by 
name. 

He  came,  and  I  then  made  the  acquaintance  of  a  man  to 
whom  I  owe  very  much.  He  has  been  my  friend  ever 
since,  and  has  attended  my  present  wife  in  her  many 
illnesses  with  a  skill  and  tenderness  and  consideration  for 
which  he  has  our  deepest  gratitude, 


92  EARLY   YEARS   OF   MARRIAGE       [CHAP,  x 

Under  his  care  the  danger  passed  away,  but  the  little  son 
was  born  dead,  and  the  dear  mother  had  to  spend  many 
weeks  with  a  nurse  at  Hastings  before  she  could  come  back 
to  home  duties. 

Dr.  Gervis  had  only  charged  me  three  guineas  for  his 
attendance,  though  he  spent  many  hours  in  the  sick-room, 
but  the  expenses  of  this  illness  fell  very  heavily  upon  me,  and 
at  a  time  when  I  had  no  reserves  to  meet  them.  I  was 
obliged  for  the  first  and  only  time  in  my  life  to  borrow 
money.  An  old  friend,  Edward  Martin  (then,  and  now, 
of  Ewell),  lent  me  £30  ;  and  the  need  of  asking  for  this 
was  a  very  heavy  trouble  to  me. 

I  had  one  great  cause  for  anxiety  in  the  fact  that  my 
life  was  not  insured,  and  that  my  wife's  £60  a  year  would 
be  her  only  resource  in  case  of  my  death. 

It  was  not  my  fault  that  I  had  no  insurance.  In  Sep- 
tember 1866  when  the  date  of  our  marriage  was  fixed,  I 
proposed  to  the  Scottish  Widows'  Fund  to  insure  for  £1,000, 
and  went  to  the  medical  officer  to  be  examined.  The  pro- 
posal was  made  at  an  unfortunate  moment.  The  doctor 
who  had  for  many  years  acted  for  the  Society  had  lately 
died  from  a  curious  accident.  He  was  pruning  a  fruit  tree 
and  the  knife  slipped  and  cut  him  so  severely  that  the  wound 
was  fatal.  Another  doctor  who  desired  to  get  the  appoint- 
ment was  temporarily  doing  duty,  and  no  doubt  wished  to 
show  that  he  was  careful  by  rejecting  somebody.  So  to  my 
great  surprise  I  heard  that  my  proposal  was  rejected. 

I  went  at  once  to  the  chief  physician  at  the  Brompton 
Hospital,  told  him  all  the  facts,  and  told  him  that  although 
the  date  of  my  marriage  was  fixed  for  a  fortnight  later, 
nothing  would  induce  me  to  go  through  with  it  if  he  found 
anything  that  could  justify  this  refusal.  He  spent  an  hour 
in  thorough  examination,  and  then  told  me  he  could  find 
nothing  whatever  which  need  give  me  the  least  hesitation 
in  carrying  out  the  marriage.  The  experience  of  fifty-one 
years  during  which  I  have  never  suffered  from  any  disease, 
and  have  been  nine  times  passed  by  the  medical  examiners 
of  Insurance  Companies,  and  twice  accepted  on  ordinary 


1866-73]  PROSPERITY  93 

terms  by  the  Scottish  Widows'  Fund  itself,  has  satisfied  me 
that  that  rejection  was  nothing  more  than  one  of  the  few 
misfortunes  of  my  life. 

But  during  my  first  year  of  marriage  the  doubt  which  I 
could  not  shake  off  troubled  me  sorely. 

I  was  not  in  debt.  My  earnings  were  sufficient  for  my 
ordinary  needs.  But  I  had  no  reserves,  and  no  source  of 
income  except  the  fees  which  might  or  might  not  be  forth- 
coming, and  which  would  stop  at  once  if  my  health  were 
from  any  cause  to  fail.  It  was  with  a  very  heavy  heart 
that  I  went  down  each  Saturday  in  October  and  November 
to  the  dear  invalid  ;  but  her  sweet  courage  and  hopefulness 
and  her  returning  health  brought  me  back  each  Monday 
refreshed  and  strengthened.  And  the  very  heavy  anxiety 
soon  came  to  an  end.  By  Christmas  she  was  back  at 
Peckham  with  all  her  old  brightness.  Those  had  been  hours 
of  darkness  before  the  dawn  of  a  long  and  prosperous  day. 
Briefs  came  in  more  freely,  and  before  1868  was  many 
months  old  I  had  repaid  my  friend  the  £30  he  lent  me, 
and  had  insured  my  life  in  the  Crown  Office  (now  the  Law 
Union  &  Rock)  for  £1,000.  Thenceforward  I  never  had  any 
money  troubles.  For  forty  years  I  was  one  of  the  richest 
men  in  the  world.  Every  year  my  income  was  larger. 
Never  did  I  spend  in  the  year  nearly  as  much  as  I  earned  ; 
so  each  Christmas  found  me  with  more  provision  made  for 
my  dear  ones,  partly  by  invested  savings,  arid  partly  by 
the  very  best  investment  of  all,  the  increase  of  my  life  in- 
surances. 

I  may  here  state  that  during  the  forty  years  from  1868- 
1907  my  fee-books  showed  an  average  income  over  the 
whole  period  of  more  than  ten  thousand  guineas  a  year 

In  1868  my  fee  book  showed  an  income  of  £300.  In  1869 
the  Cheltenham  Election  petition  accounted  for  a  rise  to 
£650.  In  1870  £540  gave  me  a  satisfactory  income  ;  1871 
brought  me  £840  ;  and  in  1872,  my  eighth  year  at  the  Bar, 
I  reached  the  figure  of  £1,010.  I  have  never  measured 
the  success  of  a  year's  work  by  the  amount  of  money 
earned;  there  are  other  and  more  important  things  to 


94  EARLY    YEARS   OF   MARRIAGE       [CHAP,  x 

consider:  but  the  enjoyment  and  expectation  of  a  con- 
stantly increasing  income  is  a  great  assurance  of  mental 
repose  and  domestic  comfort. 

Until  the  year  1872  we  continued  to  live  at  Gloucester 
Cottages.  The  home  was  certainly  a  very  small  one,  but 
we  wanted  to  feel  quite  safe  before  we  made  any  great 
increase  in  our  expenditure,  and  we  both  believed,  what  I 
am  sure  is  the  truth,  that  the  best  way  of  realising  the 
pleasure  of  feeling  rich  is  to  live  in  a  smaller  house  than  your 
means  would  entitle  you  to  have. 

In  1868  a  little  girl  was  born  to  us,  but  she  lived  only 
a  few  months,  but  in  1870  a  sweet  little  daughter,  Mabel, 
came  to  be  the  joy  of  the  household,  and  in  1872  our  cup 
of  happiness  was  filled  by  the  birth  of  my  dear  son  Percival. 

This  record  of  domestic  life  and  professional  advance  has 
taken  little  space,  but  there  is  another  part  of  my  work  of 
which  fuller  detail  must  be  given. 


CHAPTER   XI 

POLITICAL  BEGINNINGS  I     1867-1874 

DURING  the  six  years  that  passed  between  my  leaving  the 
India  Office  and  my  marriage,  I  had  found  very  little  time 
for  direct  political  work.  My  days  were  spent  at  Lincoln's 
Inn  Library,  or,  for  one  very  hard-working  year,  at  Mr. 
Bennett's  chambers,  or,  after  my  call,  in  diligent  attendance 
at  the  Courts  and  chiefly  at  the  Old  Bailey. 

Attendance,  as  regular  as  I  could  manage  at  the  debates 
of  the  Hardwicke  Society,  and  on  Thursday  and  Friday 
evenings  at  the  House  of  Commons,  was  my  only  means 
of  preparing  for  the  political  career  to  which  I  always  looked 
forward.  But  I  had  only  just  returned  from  my  short 
honeymoon  when  I  made  an  acquaintance  which  eventually 
led  to  my  active  association  with  the  organisation  of  the 
Tory  party.  I  cannot  recall  the  exact  date  or  place  of  my 
meeting  with  Henry  Cecil  Raikes,  but  it  must  have  been 
in  the  very  early  days  of  1867,  and  I  think  it  was  at  a  Hard- 
wicke debate.  / 

Tall  and  thin,  with  kindly  smiling  eyes,  and  soft  deliber- 
ate voice,  a  poet  and  a  scholar,  he  had  already,  though 
only  just  twenty- eight  years  of  age,  fought  two  contested 
elections  and  shown  himself  one  of  the  ablest  of  the  younger 
followers  of  Disraeli. 

In  1865  he  had  unsuccessfully  contested  Chester  against 
Mr.  W.  H.  Gladstone,  and  had  so  freely  assailed  the  conduct 
of  his  antagonist's  father  that  the  angry  Prime  Minister 
called  him  the  "  most  impudent  young  man  in  England." 
In  1866  he  had  fought  without  success  a  hard  fight  at 
Devonport. 

95 


96  POLITICAL   BEGINNINGS  [CHAP,  xi 

Raikes  like  myself  had  been  greatly  influenced  by  Disraeli's 
writings,  and  by  a  very  remarkable  speech  which  was  de- 
livered on  June  26th,  1863,  and  which  has  been  hitherto 
strangely  overlooked  by  the  statesman's  biographers,  and 
still  more  strangely  omitted  from  the  reprints  of  his  speeches. 

The  Tory  leader  had  then  laid  down  in  striking  language 
and  with  keen  political  instinct  the  main  principles  of  his 
political  faith.  Raikes,  shut  out  from  the  House  of  Commons 
by  his  defeat  at  Devonport,  resolved  to  attempt  the  work 
of  gathering  into  a  single  organisation  the  various  Conser- 
vative and  Constitutional  Associations  which  were  scattered 
over  the  country. 

A  Conservative  Union  existed,  but  in  a  very  feeble  and 
ineffectual  condition ;  and  with  the  sanction,  perhaps  at  the 
suggestion,  of  Lord  Nevill,  afterwards  the  Earl  of  Aber- 
gavenny,  who  was  for  thirty  years  the  least  prominent  but 
the  most  powerful  of  Mr.  Disraeli's  political  supporters,  he 
converted  it  into  a  strong  central  organisation. 

He  was  so  fortunate  as  to  find  in  John  Eldon  Gorst  a  man 
whose  qualities  exactly  fitted  him  to  become  his  associate 
and  fellow  worker  in  this  undertaking. 

Gorst  was  the  senior  by  three  years  ;  he  came  of  a  family 
one  member  of  which  had  assumed  the  name  of  Lowndes 
on  making  a  wealthy  marriage  ;  he  had  spent  a  few  adven- 
turous years  in  New  Zealand ;  and  had  been  returned  to 
the  House  of  Commons  as  member  for  Cambridge  in  1866. 

In  the  House  Gorst  had  not  distinguished  himself.  He 
had  spoken  little,  and  had  become  known  chiefly  through  a 
phrase  in  one  of  Disraeli's  speeches — "  the  Hon.  Member  for 
Cambridge  who  seems  so  proud  of  his  extreme  youth." 
The  contrast  between  him  and  Raikes  was  personal  a  s  well 
as  intellectual.  Raikes  was  tall  and  graceful ;  Gorst  was 
short,  thick-set,  bustling,  abrupt.  Raikes,  a  poet  and  a 
polished  speaker ;  Gorst,  incurably  prosaic,  with  no  pre- 
tentions  to  oratory,  and  a  total  lack  of  'humour.  But 
Raikes  was  a  little  indefinite  in  plan,  and  careless  in  detail ; 
Gorst  had  a  genius  for  organisation ;  was  a  keen  judge  of 
men,  with  an  inflexible  will,  and  an  untiring  diligence. 


867-74]      FORMING   THE   NATIONAL  UNION  97 


• 

In  later  years  he  and  Louis  Jennings  and  Drummond 
Wolff  created  the  political  Randolph  Churchill.  Gorst  was 
rough  in  manner,  and  a  little  later  differences  arose  between 
him  and  Raikes,  but  when  I  first  met  them,  early  in  1867, 
they  were  the  best  of  friends,  and  each  supplied  the  qualities 
lacking  in  the  other. 

At  their  invitation  I  attended  a  meeting  at  the  office  of 
The  Imperial  Review  in  Henrietta  Street,  Covent  Garden. 
This  was  a  weekly  paper  which  Raikes  had  just  started, 
and  which  had  a  costly  and  unprosperous  existence  for 
about  a  year  and  a  half.  Here  a  provisional  committee 
was  formed,  and  we  entered  on  the  work  of  constructing  a 
society  which  should  be  in  close  touch  with  the  leaders  of 
the  Conservative  party  and  with  which  we  hoped  every 
Conservative  Association  and  Club  throughout  the  country 
would  be  directly  connected.  Raikes,  Gorst,  W.  T.  Charley, 
A.  G.  Marten,  W.  C.  Harvey,  and  I,  all  members  of  the  Bar 
(and  all  I  think,  except  Gorst  and  Marten,  under  thirty 
years  of  age),  with  Mr.  Leonard  Sedgwick,  who  became  the 
first  secretary  of  the  new  society,  were  the  most  diligent 
attendants  at  the  early  meetings. 

In  April  The  Imperial  Review  announced  that  a  Conserva- 
tive Working  Men's  Association  for  London  and  a  "  central 
organisation  designed  to  secure  unity  of  action  among  the 
numerous  small  bodies  existing  in  the  country"  were  in 
course  of  formation,  and  Harvey  at  his  chambers  in  Lincoln's 
Inn  acted  as  honorary  secretary.  On  June  i7th  the  first 
meeting  of  the  Metropolitan  Conservative  Working  Men's 
Association  was  held  at  the  Mechanics'  Institute  at  South- 
ampton Buildings. 

Ten  days  later  a  Conference  of  the  Conservative  and 
Constitutional  Associations  of  Lancashire  was  held  at 
Manchester  to  concert  measures  for  the  organisation  of  the 
party. 

The  autumn  was  spent  in  busy  correspondence,  and  Raikes 
and  Gorst  travelled  much  and  made  many  speeches.  By 
November  the  preliminary  arrangements  were  complete, 
and  on  the  izth  of  that  month  a  conference  of  the  delegates 


98  POLITICAL   BEGINNINGS  [CHAP.  XI 

from  seventy  associations  was  held  at  the  Freemasons' 
Tavern,  and  the  National  Union  of  Conservative  and  Con- 
stitutional Associations  was  then  established.  Gorst  (who 
presided  at  the  conference)  and  Raikes  were  among  the 
Vice-Presidents  then  elected.  Viscount  Holmesdale  was 
appointed  Chairman  of  the  Council,  and  Raikes  Vice-Chair- 
man. Leonard  Sedgwick,  who  was  recommended  by  Lord 
Nevill,  was  made  Hon.  Secretary.  On  the  evening  of  the 
same  day  a  dinner  was  held  at  the  Crystal  Palace,  and 
Lord  John  Manners,  who  presided,  read  a  letter  from  Disraeli 
in  which  he  said,  "  None  are  so  interested  in  maintaining 
the  institutions  of  the  country  as  the  working  classes.  The 
rich  and  the  powerful  will  not  find  much  difficulty  under  any 
circumstances  in  maintaining  their  rights,  but  the  privileges 
of  the  people  can  only  be  defended  and  secured  by  national 
institutions/' 

The  Imperial  Review  of  November  23rd  contained  the 
first  advertisement  of  the  new  organisation. 

The  National  Union  has  for  its  object  the  forming  a 
centre  [sic]  which  while  repudiating  any  appearance  of 
dictating  will  endeavour  to  give  unity  of  idea  and  of  action 
to  the  Constitutional  Associations  which  are  being  formed 
throughout  the  country.  It  has  been  established  by  Lord 
Nevill,  and  has  met  with  the  hearty  support  and  concurrence 
of  the  most  influential  members  of  the  Conservative  party. 

Colonel  Taylor  and  Gerard  Noel,  the  Conservative  Whips, 
were  among  the  Vice-Presidents.  A  council  of  twenty  was 
appointed  of  which  the  six  already  mentioned  (Raikes, 
Gorst,  Charley,  Marten,  Harvey,  and  I)  were  members, 
and  the  first  home  of  the  new  association  was  at  the  office 
of  The  Imperial  Review  at  19,  Henrietta  Street. 

In  December  a  circular  was  issued  explaining  the  object 
of  the  National  Union  to  be  "  to  give  unity  of  ideas  and 
action  to  the  Constitutional  Associations  which  are  now 
being  formed  throughout  the  country." 

The  Reform  Bill  of  1867,  with  its  large  extension  of  the 
suffrage,  had  just  been  passed,  and  our  object  was  to  address 


1867-74]  FIRST   POLITICAL  SPEECH  99 

ourselves  as  soon  as  possible  to  the  newly-enfranchised 
voters.  The  circular  mentioned  as  one  important  means  of 
increasing  the  influence  of  these  associations  the  holding 
of  quarterly  meetings  at  which  a  speaker  sent  down  by  the 
National  Union,  if  local  speakers  were  not  available,  would 
deal  with  important  public  questions.  The  first  meeting 
to  which  the  Council  were  asked  to  send  a  speaker  was  the 
quarterly  meeting  of  the  York  Conservative  Association 
held  at  the  Assembly  Rooms  on  January  8th,  1868. 

I  went  to  York  as  the  first  spokesman  of  the  National 
Union,  and  there  made  my  first  political  speech  on  a  public 
platform.  And  the  Council  were  so  well  pleased  with  their 
representative  that  the  first  pamphlet  issued  by  the  Union 
was  a  selection  of  passages  from  the  speech  I  then  delivered. 

I  quote  from  the  copy  which  lies  before  me  a  few  sentences 
from  the  speech  which  began  a  career  of  political  activity 
which  lasted  for  thirty-eight  years. 

In  the  House  of  Commons  we  have  now  a  united  and 

therefore  a   powerful  party.      In   1846   the  Conservative 

party  was  divided,  cast  down,  and  dispirited.     But  during 

the  last  twenty  years  a  wonderful  change  has  been  eflected, 

and  chiefly  by  the  consummate  genius  of  the  greatest  of 

living  politicians — the  present  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer 

—the  party  has  been  reorganised,  and  now  by  the  power 

of  its  unity  it  holds  a  commanding  position  in  the  legislature, 

and  it  has  a  just  confidence  in  the  statesmen  who  have 

guided  it  so  well.     But  besides  trusted  leaders  and  a  united 

parliamentary  party,  it  is  necessary  to  have  that  steady 

popular  support  upon  which  the  success  of  any  political 

combination  must  depend.     This  is  what  the  National 

Union    of   Conservative   and   Constitutional   Associations 

will  secure,  and  in  this  work  you  have  done  good  service 

to-night.     The  battle  must  be  fought  through  the  agency 

of  associations  such  as  yours,  and  I  trust,  indeed  I  have 

every  reason  to  predict,  that  there  will  soon  be  not  a  single 

important  town  in   the   country  where  a  Constitutional 

Association  will  not  be  in  successful  operation.     Thus  the 

great  National  party  will  be  consolidated,  and  we  may 

confidently  look  forward  to  the  peace  and  prosperity  of 

our  country  being  assured  by  a  just,  an  enlightened,  and  a 

Constitutional  policy. 


ioo  POLITICAL   BEGINNINGS  [CHAP,  xi 

The  election  of  1868  was  a  disaster,  but  we  worked  hard 
and  had  the  happiness  of  seeing  the  Tory  party  gradually 
rise  from  the  almost  unbroken  record  of  defeat  and  impotence 
which  began  in  1846  until  in  1874  it  came  back  to  office  and 
power,  and  in  six  years  vindicated  by  the  courage  and 
wisdom  of  its  domestic  legislation  and  the  firmness  and 
foresight  of  its  Imperial  policy  all  the  hopes  we  had  cherished 
in  those  early  days  of  darkness  and  defeat. 

The  years  1867  and  1868  were  years  of  great  political 
activity  in  the  House  of  Commons  and  throughout  the 
country.  Mr.  Gladstone  had  abandoned  the  hope  of 
passing  a  Reform  Bill  through  the  House  of  Commons,  and 
Disraeli  had  undertaken  the  apparently  hopeless  task  of 
trying  to  do  so  in  a  House  in  which  the  Liberals  had  a 
majority  of  sixty-five  His  leadership  during  the  months 
from  February  to  August  1867  was  a  marvellous  exhibition 
of  patience  and  skill. 

The  Russell  Government  had  fallen  upon  the  question  of 
a  rental  as  opposed  to  a  rating  franchise. 

Disraeli  sent  for  Thring,  the  parliamentary  draftsman, 
and  told  him  that  the  Bill  must  be  so  drawn  that  this 
question  would  have  to  be  raised  by  the  first  amendment. 
Thring  obeyed  instructions,  and  the  result  was  that  the 
first  division  on  the  Bill  showed  Disraeli  voting  in  a 
majority  of  310  and  Gladstone  with  a  minority  of  289. 
Many  concessions  had,  of  course,  to  be  made,  but  Disraeli's 
parliamentary  success  may  be  gauged  by  the  fact  that  in  the 
course  of  the  struggle  there  were  twenty-three  important 
divisions  in  which  Gladstone  and  Disraeli  voted  on  opposite 
sides,  and  in  eighteen  of  these  Disraeli  was  in  the  winning 
lobby.  The  third  reading  passed  without  a  division. 

The  Bill  became  law  in  August,  and  there  followed  a 
twelvemonth  of  a  very  active  work  in  the  enlarged  con- 
stituencies. 

It  was  upon  the  question  of  the  Irish  Church  Establish- 
ment that  the  chief  controversy  chiefly  raged.  I  prepared 
lectures  on  that  subject  and  delivered  them  at  Lewes,  at 
King's  Lynn,  at  Dover,  at  Southampton,  and  in  different 


1867-74]  SWANSEA,  /\  : ,  J  \< 

parts  of  London.  As  the  election  drew  near  I  became  very 
busy  indeed.  A  lecture  I  gave  at  Cheltenham  led  to  my 
being  retained  (I  forget  the  amount  of  the  fee)  to  spend  a 
week  in  the  town,  speaking  every  evening,  and  canvassing 
during  the  day  with  the  candidate,  five  years  younger  than 
myself,  my  staunch  friend  ever  since,  Mr.  (now  Sir  James) 
Agg-Gardner.  The  week  ended  with  a  dinner  given  to  me 
on  the  Saturday  night  by  (or  for)  the  working  men  of  the 
town.  Then  I  went  off  to  Cardiff,  where  my  friend  Hardinge 
Giffard  was  fighting  his  first  contest.  There  my  association 
with  Working  Men's  Clubs  was  utilised,  and  besides  speaking 
at  the  ordinary  election  meetings  I  addressed  a  very  large 
gathering  at  the  Drill  Hall  on"  Questions  for  Working  Men." 
They  were  so  pleased  with  my  speaking  at  Cardiff  that  I  was 
asked  to  stay  on  a  few  days  and  speak  at  Swansea.  I  said 
I  would  if  they  would  have  an  open  public  meeting.  They 
said  it  could  not  be  done  ;  no  Tory  meeting  had  ever  been 
held  with  open  doors,  and  it  would  not  be  safe  for  the 
speakers.  I  was  firm,  and  the  meeting  was  announced  as  I 
wished.  The  Victoria  Hall  (I  think  it  was)  was  crowded,  but 
evidently  not  by  our  friends.  Not  a  word  of  the  Chairman's 
Speech  could  be  heard.  Then  I  came  to  the  semi-circular 
rail  in  front  of  the  platform,  and  stood  there  for,  I  suppose, 
nearly  half  an  hour  without  getting  a  full  sentence  heard. 
At  last  a  well-known  dissenting  minister  rose  in  the  body  of 
the  hall,  and  made  an  appeal  to  all  true  Liberals  to  give  me 
a  hearing.  The  crowd  listened  to  a  few  sentences,  and  some- 
how I  got  their  attention. 

With  some  interruptions  I  made  them  an  hour's  speech: 
they  seemed  to  think  I  had  shown  some  pluck,  and  I  got  a 
good  cheer  at  leaving.  But  I  did  not  know  until  the  next 
morning  what  an  escape  I  had  had :  in  the  galleries  were 
picked  up  pieces  of  rough  granite,  half  a  barrowful.  They 
were  meant  as  missiles,  and  it  was  fortunate  for  me  that  no 
one  had  set  an  example  of  using  them. 

During  a  few  days  at  Cardiff  I  stayed  with  Mr.  Sherley 
(of  Luard  and  Sherley,  Lord  Bute's  agents),  and  he  talked 
to  me  about  the  new  paper,  The  Western  Mail,  which  was 
8 


102  ^OLITiCAX   BEGINNINGS  [CHAP,  xi 

just  about  to  appear,  and  introduced  me  to  Mr.  Adams,  the 
rather  curious  person  who  had  been  chosen  as  the  first 
editor.  (He  afterwards  married  Lord  Coleridge's  daughter 
and  was  plaintiff  in  a  singular  action.) 

Just  before  going  to  Cardiff  I  had  made  a  speech  at  a 
meeting  at  Hackney,  and  while  staying  with  Mr.  Shei  ley  I 
received  a  letter  signed  by  Thomas  Brooks,  Chairman,  and 
Edward  Wimble,  Secretary,  on  behalf  of  the  Hackney 
election  committee,  asking  me  to  stand  for  that  borough. 
This  invitation  was,  of  course,  at  once  declined ;  but  I 
saw  a  good  deal  afterwards  of  Edward  Wimble,  who  was 
one  of  the  best  of  the  subordinate  agents  whose  work  led 
up  to  the  triumph  of  1874. 

There  is  not  much  that  needs  to  be  recorded  of  my  political 
activities  during  the  five  years  after  the  1868  election.  I 
lectured  a  good  deal,  and  when  a  by-election  took  place  I 
often  had  some  share  in  the  speaking.  1869  brought  a 
very  pleasant  reminder  of  the  Cheltenham  election  in  the 
shape  of  my  first  brief  (with  a  fee  of  fifty  guineas  and  a 
refresher  of  thirty)  in  an  election  petition.  Agg-Gardner 
petitioned  and  claimed  the  seat :  and  the  report  of  that 
trial  gives  a  fair  idea  of  the  roughness  of  political  contests 
in  those  days. 

Chesshyre,  the  solicitor  and  agent  for  the  Liberal  candi- 
date, brought  a  mob  of  roughs,  some  of  them  prize-fighters, 
over  from  Birmingham,  and  established  them  in  an  empty 
house  in  the  town.  Each  man  had  a  coloured  neckcloth 
and  a  thick  stick  given  him,  and  they  ranged  over  the  town, 
breaking  up  the  Tory  meetings,  hustling  Tory  canvassers, 
and  protecting  others  from  observation.  A  retired  detective 
named  Field  was  sent  down  to  watch  them  :  he  passed  as 
a  photographer,  but  he  was  found  out  and  set  upon  and  left 
lying  in  the  street  with  a  broken  leg.  Baron  Martin  was 
the  Judge  ;  he  decided  that  the  evidence  of  bribery  was  not 
sufficient :  while  as  to  the  prize-fighters  he  only  said  that 
bringing  them  down  like  that  was  very  wrong,  very  wrong 
indeed. 

I  soon  began  to  make  preparations  for  standing  for  the 


1867-74]  SOUTHWARK  103 

London  constituency  which  elected  me  some  years  later. 
The  sitting  members  for  the  borough  were  John  Locke,  a 
Liberal,  one  of  the  most  popular  of  the  leaders  on  the  Home 
Circuit,  and  Marcus  Beresford,  a  Tory,  a  Colonel  in  the 
Volunteers,  and  a  large  wharf- owner  in  the  borough. 

Colonel  Beresford  was  a  very  useful  Member  of  Parlia- 
ment, of  the  type  dear  to  party  managers  ;  a  regular  atten- 
dant, a  safe  vote  for  his  party,  and  very  diligent  in  the 
interests  of  his  constituents.  But  he  was  a  poor  speaker, 
and  not  very  good  in  expressing  himself  in  formal  letters. 
I  had  made  his  acquaintance  at  the  Surrey  Sessions,  and 
sometimes  met  him  at  political  meetings  in  the  South  of 
London.  In  December  1872  he  wrote  to  me  making  two 
proposals.  One  was  that  I  should,  "  if  I  would  not  open 
my  mouth  too  widely  in  the  matter  of  fees,"  supply  him 
with  notes  for  speeches  in  or  out  of  the  House  of  Commons. 
The  other  was  that  I  should  become  the  recognised  candidate 
for  Southwark  on  the  Tory  side,  as  his  intention  was  to 
retire  from  Parliament  at  the  next  General  Election.  I 
would  not  accept  any  fees,  but  we  came  to  an  understanding 
that  I  would  help  him  with  his  speeches,  and  would  draft 
resolutions  or  letters  for  him,  but  that  nothing  should  be 
said  for  the  present  as  to  the  succession  to  his  seat.  In  the 
early  part  of  1873  the  difficulties  of  Mr.  Gladstone's  Govern- 
ment became  serious,  and  their  defeat  on  the  Irish  Univer- 
sity Bill  and  consequent  resignation,  although  they  returned 
to  office  on  the  refusal  of  Mr.  Disraeli  to  form  an  administra- 
tion, set  all  political  workers  in  preparation  for  a  dissolution. 
The  Chairman  of  the  Conservative  party  in  Surrey  wrote 
to  me  in  March  to  say  that  it  was  likely  that  Baggallay, 
one  of  the  members  for  Mid-Surrey,  would  get  a  judgeship, 
and  asking  if  in  that  event  I  would  be  willing  to  stand  for 
that  division.  But  my  time  for  entering  the  House  of 
Commons  had  not  yet  come,  and  I  devoted  myself  chiefly 
to  my  work  as  Chairman  of  the  Conservative  Association 
in  the  borough  of  Lambeth,  which  was  even  larger  than 
Southwark,  and  which  Morgan  Howard,  who  had  made  a 
great  fight  there  in  1868,  was  preparing  to  contest  again. 


104  POLITICAL   BEGINNINGS  [CHAP,  xi 

In  May  I  began  collecting  subscriptions  towards  an  election 
fund,  and  by  the  end  of  the  year  over  £2,000  was  in  the  bank 
in  the  names  of  Mr.  John  Scott  and  myself,  and  I  had  the 
promise  of  another  £1,000  from  the  party  funds.  Before 
the  Long  Vacation  everything  had  been  put  in  order  for  the 
contest,  chairman  and  committee  appointed  for  each  of  the 
seventeen  wards,  ward  street-lists  bound,  and  canvassing 
books  ready  for  immediate  use. 

During  the  autumn  I  had  the  amusing  and  useful  experi- 
ence of  fighting  an  election  at  Dover  as  Deputy  candidate. 
In  1871  the  appointment  of  Jessel  as  Solicitor-General  had 
caused  a  by-election,  and  I  had  been  down  there  to  make 
a  speech  at  the  introduction  to  the  constituency  of  a  Mr. 
Bar  net  t,  a  railway  contractor  who  had  made  a  fortune  in 
India  by  building  the  railway  from  Bombay  to  Calcutta, 
and  incidentally  starting  a  newspaper  in  Calcutta  which  so 
long  as  the  line  was  incomplete  had  a  very  valuable  priority 
in  getting  news  from  Europe.     Jessel  held  the  seat,  but  in 
1873  he  vacated  it  on  becoming  Master  of  the  Rolls.    Barnett 
had  sailed  for  South  America  a  few  days  before  this  was 
announced,  on  another  railway  undertaking.    The  Tories 
at  Dover  were  in  a  great  difficulty.     Forbes,  the  Chairman 
of  the  Chatham  and  Dover  Railway,  was  in  the  field  at  once 
on  the  Liberal  side.     Barnett  could  not  be  communicated 
with,  but  it  was  known  that  he  had  intended  to  try  again, 
and  it  was  determined  to  put  him  forward,  and  Gorst  sent 
for  me  and  asked  me  to  go  down  and  fight  the  election.     I 
wrote  the  address,  and  went  down,  and  stayed  a  fortnight 
at  the  Lord  Warden  Hotel,  speaking  on  most  evenings  and 
canvassing  every  day.     Dover  had  always  been  known  as 
a  corrupt  constituency :    and  this  election  had  a  special 
interest,  as  it  was  the  first  in  that  borough  under  the  ballot. 
There  were  a  good  many  "  freemen  "  at  Dover  :  and  there, 
as  in  other  boroughs  where  voters  of  this  inferior  class  were 
found,  the  method  of  purchasing  their  votes  was  very  simple. 
Some  of  the  "  freemen  "  were  Liberal,  some  were  Tory. 
They  and  their  fathers  before  them  had  always  voted  for 
their  party,  and  were  not  easily  persuaded  to  vote  against 


1867-74]  DOVER  105 

it,  but  unless  they  were  paid  they  would  not  vote  at  all,  even 
if  they  could  not  be  tempted  over  to  the  other  side.  Some 
trusted  leader  of  each  group  arranged  with  an  agent  of  the 
candidate  how  much  should  be  paid:  it  was  his  business 
to  bring  his  men  to  the  poll :  and  in  the  days  of  open  voting 
it  could,  of  course,  be  known  how  many  had  earned  their 
pay.  The  ballot  made  the  matter  much  more  difficult, 
for  now  there  was  no  means  of  knowing  whether  the  pur- 
chased vote  had  been  given  on  the  right  side.  And  at  this 
election  a  very  sharp  watch  was  kept  by  detectives  employed 
on  either  side.  I  have  no  doubt  there  was  some  bribery, 
although  of  course  I,  as  the  candidate,  was  not  told  anything 
about  it :  but  a  number  of  voters  were  disappointed  :  and 
when  the  polling  day  came  the  actual  promises  were  not 
quite  satisfactory,  and  there  were  a  good  many  voters 
loitering  about  the  town  who  had  not  yet  quite  made  up 
their  minds.  In  the  afternoon  I  drove  round  the  outlying 
parts  of  the  borough  and  told  the  loiterers  there  that  they 
need  not  trouble  to  come  in  to  vote,  we  could  win  without 
them,  but  it  was  a  pity  they  should  lose  the  pleasure  of 
being  on  the  winning  side.  I  think  most  of  them  came  in  : 
we  had  a  large  poll,  and  won  by  326,  the  largest  majority  a 
Conservative  had  ever  had  in  Dover.  The  result  was  most 
satisfactory  to  me,  but  poor  Barnett  never  took  his  seat. 
Before  he  returned  to  England  the  General  Election  came, 
and  I  think  he  found  he  had  spent  more  money  in  the  two 
contests  than  he  had  expected  them  to  cost.  He  never 
reappeared  in  English  politics. 

On  Saturday  January  24th,  1874,  came  the  sudden 
announcement  of  the  General  Election.  In  the  previous 
August  Gladstone  had  told  the  Queen  that  it  was  the 
intention  of  the  Government  to  meet  Parliament,  and  that 
they  hoped  to  carry  through  the  business  of  a  full  session. 
But  there  had  been  difficulties  with  Cardwell  about  the 
estimates :  two  by-elections  at  Stroud  and  Newcastle  had 
shown  the  growing  strength  of  the  Opposition  in  the  con- 
stituencies; and  there  was  behind  all  this  the  personal 
difficulty  which  had  arisen  with  regard  to  his  seat  for 


lo6  POLITICAL   BEGINNINGS  [CHAP,  xi 

Greenwich.  Coleridge  and  Jessel  had  advised  that  his 
acceptance  of  the  office  of  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  in 
addition  to  that  of  First  Lord  of  the  Treasury,  which  he  had 
held  since  the  formation  of  the  Ministry,  did  not  vacate 
his  seat.  But  Harcourt  and  James,  who  were  now  the  Law 
Officers,  and  who  took  Bowen  into  consultation,  declined  to 
express  any  opinion,  and  the  Lord  Chancellor,  Selborne,  was 
insistent  in  his  opinion  that  the  taking  of  this  additional 
office  had  rendered  the  seat  vacant. 

Notice  had  been  sent  to  the  Prime  Minister  that  if  he  sat 
and  voted  he  would  be  sued  for  penalties,  and  the  Opposition 
Whip  had  told  the  Speaker  that  the  question  would  be 
raised  as  soon  as  the  House  met.  A  strong  Conservative 
candidate  was  ready  to  come  forward.  The  defeat  of  the 
Prime  Minister  at  a  by-election,  the  delay  involved  in  finding 
him  a  safe  seat  elsewhere,  would  have  been  dangerous  to  a 
ministry  already  seriously  weakened.  This  personal  diffi- 
culty was  not  the  main  cause  of  the  decision  to  dissolve,  but 
it  cannot  have  been  without  its  effect. 

Gladstone's  address  appeared  in  The  Times  on  Saturday 
morning.  At  5  o'clock  that  afternoon  I  was  in  the  chair  at 
a  full  meeting  of  the  Council  of  the  Lambeth  Association : 
the  seventeen  ward  registers  were  on  the  table,  and  each 
volume  was  handed  over  to  the  ward  chairman,  and  he  went 
off  to  meet  his  ward  committee  later  in  the  evening.  I  had 
made  up  my  mind  to  do  nothing  in  the  election,  except  to 
speak  and  canvass  in  the  borough  of  Lambeth,  but  a  couple 
of  days  later  an  unfortunate  difference  arose  between  me 
and  Morgan  Howard  as  to  the  control  of  expenditure  during 
the  election.  As  the  funds  had  been  collected  by  me,  and 
stood  in  my  name  at  the  bank,  I  thought  I  ought  to  be 
consulted  before  any  large  contracts  were  made  for  printing 
or  advertising  or  the  expenses  of  public  meetings.  Howard 
refused  to  consult  me  at  all,  and  claimed  that  he  had  the 
sole  right  of  controlling  expenditure,  and  that  my  duty  was 
simply  to  pay  over  the  money.  I  could  not  accept  this 
position,  so  vacated  the  chair  in  favour  of  the  vice-chair- 
man, on  the  ostensible  ground  that  I  was  wanted  in  other 


. 


I867-74J  WOODSTOCK  107 

parts  of  the  country.  It  was  a  fortunate  release  for  me,  as 
it  led  to  my  making  acquaintance  with  Lord  Randolph 
Churchill  in  circumstances  which  led  to  a  friendship  that 
lasted,  with  one  interruption,  to  the  end  of  his  life. 

On  the  following  Tuesday  I  went  down  to  make  a 
speech  at  Woodstock.  At  Woodstock  Road  I  was  met 
by  Mr.  Barnett,  a  banker  and  the  agent  of  the  Duke  of 
Marlborough,  who  had  for  nine  years  occupied  the  seat  until 
one  of  the  Duke's  sons  should  be  ready  and  willing  to  stand. 
As  he  drove  me  across  the  country  in  a  wagonette  he  gave 
me  some  account  of  the  political  situation  in  the  borough. 
It  had  always  been  looked  upon  as  a  pocket  borough  of  the 
Duke  of  Marlborough's,  but  at  the  election  in  1868  Mr. 
George  Brodrick  (afterwards  Warden  of  Merton),  a  brother 
of  Lord  Midleton,  had  very  nearly  captured  the  seat,  the 
majority  against  him  being  only  twenty-one.  This  election 
was  expected  to  be  very  close,  and  in  view  of  the  fact  that  the 
Ballot  Act  had  passed  and  was  supposed  to  have  greatly 
weakened  territorial  influence  the  Radicals  had  strong 
hope  of  winning  the  seat.  The  Tory  candidate  was  Lord 
Randolph  Churchill,  the  younger  son  of  the  Duke,  who  was 
only  twenty-four  years  of  age  and  had  never  shown  any 
interest  in  political  work. 

Indeed,  there  had  been  difficulty  in  persuading  him  to 
stand.  He  had  only  consented  on  getting  his  father's 
reluctant  consent  to  his  marriage  to  a  beautiful  American 
girl,  a  Miss  Jerome,  whom  he  had  met  at  the  Isle  of  Wight  in 
the  previous  autumn  and  to  whom  he  had  become  engaged 
after  three  days'  acquaintance.  Mr.  George  Brodrick  was 
standing  again,  and  at  the  urgent  request  of  the  Duke  the 
Tory  organisers  had  agreed  to  send  down  a  speaker.  When 
we  reached  Woodstock  we  heard  as  we  drove  past  the  public 
hall  the  cheers  of  the  Liberals  whom  Mr.  Brodrick  was 
addressing. 

Arrived  at  the  principal  inn,  we  went  upstairs,  and  there 
in  a  large  low-ceilinged  room  I  found  some  thirty  or  forty 
solid-looking  gentlemen  who  were  apparently  awaiting  my 
arrival. 


io8  POLITICAL   BEGINNINGS  [CHAP,  xi 

I  shook  hands  with  the  chairman  and  asked  when  the 
meeting  was  to  take  place.  "  Oh,"  said  he,  "  this  is  the 
meeting  ;  these  are  all  good  friends  of  ours  who  are  looking 
forward  to  the  pleasure  of  hearing  you." 

I  accepted  the  situation  and  gave  them  an  hour's  speech 
on  general  topics.  Then  I  asked  about  a  public  meeting, 
and  was  told  that  the  Tory  candidate  was  so  young  and  so 
inexperienced  in  public  speaking  that  it  had  been  decided 
not  to  have  a  larger  meeting,  but  to  trust  to  the  canvassing 
of  the  gentlemen  I  had  just  addressed.  I  vehemently  pro- 
tested. I  told  them  I  did  not  believe  there  was  a  con- 
stituency in  England  that  could  be  won  by  a  candidate 
whose  friends  did  not  venture  to  put  him  on  the  platform, 
and  after  much  discussion  it  was  agreed  that  if  I  would  stay 
and  speak  a  meeting  should  be  held. 

I  was  due  at  Bath  on  the  following  day,  so  the  meeting 
was  fixed  for  the  Friday  evening.  I  went  on  to  Bath  and 
spoke  there  on  Wednesday  at  a  dinner  given  to  Lord  Grey  de 
Wilton  and  Major  Bousfield,  and  the  next  morning  came 
back  to  Woodstock.  Then  I  met  Lord  Randolph  Churchill, 
a  nervous,  rather  awkward  young  man,  who  certainly 
seemed  to  have  the  most  elementary  ideas  about  current 
politics.  We  had  some  talk  about  the  subjects  he  was  going 
to  deal  with  in  his  speech.  I  wrote  out  four  or  five  questions 
which  were  to  be  put  into  friendly  hands  and  asked  from 
the  back  of  the  room,  and  gave  Lord  Randolph  the  answers. 
When  we  came  to  the  meeting  Lord  Randolph  was  very 
nervous.  He  had  written  out  his  speech  on  small  sheets 
of  paper,  and  thought  that  if  he  put  his  hat  on  the  table  and 
the  papers  in  the  bottom  of  the  hat  he  would  be  able  to 
read  them.  This,  of  course,  he  could  not  do.  There  was  a 
rather  noisy  audience,  who  gibed  at  him  and  shouted  to  him 
to  take  the  things  out  of  his  hat,  and  so  on,  and  the  speech 
was  far  from  being  a  success.  But  the  questions  and  answers 
went  very  well ;  then  I  made  a  speech,  and  taken  altogether 
the  meeting  went  off  very  well.  The  next  morning  Lord 
Randolph  wrote  to  Miss  Jerome :  "  We  had  a  good  meeting 
last  night  which  was  very  successful.  We  had  a  good 


1867-74]  CARDIFF  109 

speaker  down  from  London  and  I  made  a  speech."  The 
result  of  the  polling  was  a  great  disappointment  to  the 
Liberals,  for  they  were  beaten  by  569  votes  to  404.  A 
fortnight  later  I  had  a  letter  from  Lord  Randolph  from 
Paris,  where  he  hastened  to  join  Miss  Jerome  directly  the 
election  was  over. 

He  said,  "  I  really  am  quite  confident  that  many  of  the 
votes,  if  not  the  majority,  may  be  attributed  to  your  ex- 
cellent speech." 

I  then  went  to  Cardiff  to  speak  for  Hardinge  Giffard,  who 
was  making  a  second  attempt  to  win  the  seat.  Except 
upon  the  platform,  where  he  was  always  good,  he  was  a  very 
poor  candidate. 

Mr.  Sherley  complained  to  me  that  he  was  very  idle 
about  canvassing,  preferring  to  stay  at  home  and  read,  and 
that  when  he  did  canvass  he  was  very  unconciliatory.  He 
was  beaten  by  nine  votes,  and  when  I  met  him  in 
London  I  congratulated  him  on  his  defeat.  He  was  very 
downcast,  and  thought  I  was  unkindly  laughing  at  him. 
I  told  him  my  congratulations  were  quite  sincere ;  that  if 
he  had  been  elected  by  nine  votes  his  party  could  not 
have  made  him  a  law  officer  for  fear  of  losing  the  seat. 

"  Now,"  said  I,  "  you  will  make  a  lot  of  money  in 
election  petitions,  and  then  they  will  find  you  a  safe  seat, 
and  give  you  office."  My  prediction  cheered  him  up  and 
was  exactly  fulfilled ;  indeed  his  good  fortune  was  greater 
than  I  had  foretold,  for  at  the  trial  of  the  election  petition 
at  Windsor  he  met  Miss  Woodfall,  the  niece  of  his  client, 
and  found  in  her  a  charming  wife  through  whom  a  large 
fortune  came  to  their  children. 


CHAPTER   XII 

MASONIC  AND   DOMESTIC  I     1874-1877 

I  MAY  here  interpose  an  account  of  one  of  the  interests  and 
activities  of  my  life  without  which  the  story  would  be  in- 
complete.    In  the  year  1861  I  was  on  a  walking  trip  through 
North  Wales,  and  staying  a  couple  of  nights  at  Dolgelly 
I  made  the  acquaintance  of  two  young  men  who  were 
spending  their  holiday  together.     One  was  Nelson  Ward, 
a  grandson  of  the  great  admiral,  son  of  the  Horatia  whom 
he  bequeathed  to  the  care  of  the  nation.     She  was  not 
wholly  neglected  and  had  a  pension  of  £300  a  year.     One 
of  her  sons  became  a  Commander  in  the  Navy,  another,  my 
travelling  acquaintance,  had  a  clerkship  in  Chancery,  and 
eventually  became  a  Registrar,  and  the  pension  was  con- 
tinued to  a  daughter  who  survived  her.      This  daughter 
married  a  young  solicitor  named  William  Johnson,  who 
was  with   his  brother-in-law   at   Dolgelly.      The   chance 
meeting  had  very  pleasant  results  for  me.    A  close  friend- 
ship grew  up  between  us  and  lasted  until  their  deaths  many 
years  later.     I  used  occasionally  to  go  to  Pinner  to  see  the 
dear  old  lady,  whose  rooms  were  full  of  drawings  and  en- 
gravings and  mementoes  of  her  illustrious  father  and  of 
Lady  Hamilton.     She  herself  in  face  and  figure  was  very 
like  the  portraits  of  Lord  Nelson.    The  friendship  with 
William  Johnson  had  more  important  consequences.    He 
was  the  Secretary  of  the  Masonic  Lodge  "  Caledonian  134," 
and  in  the  year  1871  I  was  initiated  into  Masonry  at  that 
Lodge.    We  used  to  meet  at  the  Ship  and  Turtle  in  Leaden- 
hall  Street.    Two  of  the  other  members  of  the  Lodge  may 
here  be  named.    One  was  E.  W.  Mackney,  in  his  day  the 
most  popular  of  comic  singers,  and  the  first  and  best  of 

no 


1874-7] 


A   GREAT    INSTALLATION 


in 


negro  melodists.  Mackney  told  me  that  his  father  had 
been  an  usher  in  the  school  at  Epping  Forest  where  young 
Disraeli  spent  some  years  between  1815  and  1821.  And  he 
told  me  that  many  years  later  when  Disraeli  was  in  office — 
it  must,  I  think,  have  been  in  1852 — his  father,  who  had  not 
been  very  prosperous,  made  some  appeal  to  his  old  pupil, 
and  was  very  kindly  and  generously  received.  The  other 
was  Joshua  Nunn,  who  was  United  States  Consul  in  London, 
and  whose  acquaintance  proved  useful  to  me  in  my  pro- 
fession. During  the  year  1872  the  question  of  the  indirect 
claims  arising  out  of  the  blockade  running  during  the 
American  Civil  War  required  a  great  deal  of  evidence  to  be 
taken  on  commission  in  London,  and  I  find  that  in  four 
cases  of  this  kind  I  appeared  as  Counsel  for  the  United 
States  Government. 

I  was  very  diligent  in  my  Masonic  duties,  and  learning 
with  facility  the  voluminous  addresses  and  the  elaborate 
ritual  of  the  craft  I  went  very  quickly  through  the  offices 
of  the  Lodge.  So  quickly  that  when  in  1875  the  Prince  of 
Wales,  afterwards  Edward  VII,  was  installed  Grand  Master 
of  Masons  in  England  I  was  already  Master  of  the  Cale- 
donian Lodge.  The  great  ceremony  of  the  Prince's  in- 
stallation took  place  at  the  Albert  Hall,  and  was  the  most 
picturesque  and  impressive  public  function  I  ever  witnessed. 
Some  8,000  Masons,  all  of  them  Masters  or  Wardens  or 
Past  Masters  of  their  respective  lodges,  filled  the  great  hall. 
The  floor  was  a  mass  of  purple,  the  clothing  of  the  Grand 
and  Provincial  Grand  officers,  along  each  line  of  seats  ran 
a  band  of  light  blue,  the  collars  and  aprons  of  the  officers 
of  the  craft.  The  seating  was  controlled  by  Thomas  Fenn, 
an  old  and  much  respected  Mason  ;  and  besides  the  ordinary 
stewards  he  had  under  him  a  staff  of  about  twenty  aides-de- 
camp, each  the  actual  Master  of  his  lodge,  of  whom  I  had 
the  good  fortune  to  be  one.  I  had  a  pass-key  which  opened 
every  door  of  the  building,  and  so  I  was  able  to  see  the 
magnificent  spectacle  from  every  point  of  view.  When  the 
Lodge  was  closely  tiled  and  the  ceremony  commenced  the 
aides-de-camp  joined  their  chief  on  the  side  of  the  platform. 


H2  MASONIC   AND   DOMESTIC  [CHAP,  xn 

The  Prince  filled  his  place  nobly,  and  his  fine  resonant 
voice  rang  out  clearly  in  the  crowded  hall. 

It  was  a  strangely  emotional  assembly.  When  the  first 
salute  was  given  it  was  a  little  ragged  and  uncertain,  and 
there  was  a  whisper  of  dissatisfaction.  Sir  Albert  Woods 
paused  a  little,  and  when  next  he  gave  the  signal  the 
thousands  of  hands  met  with  a  sharp  volume  of  sound 
which  had  an  extraordinary  effect.  I  saw  old  men  near 
me  crying  like  children.1 

I  kept  up  my  Masonic  work  until  I  became  member  for 
Plymouth.  Then  I  practically  abandoned  it  for  twenty 
years.  Parliamentary  duties  made  it  difficult  to  attend 
lodge  meetings  or  banquets  in  London,  and  I  would  not  take 
part  in  Masonic  work  at  Plymouth,  partly  because  I  wished 
to  avoid  the  slightest  possibility  of  its  being  connected  with 
politics,  and  partly  because  I  should  have  been  burdened 
with  the  necessity  of  paying  equal  attention  to  each  of  the 
three  lodges  which  flourished  in  my  constituency. 

So  for  many  years  I  only  went  to  Masonic  gatherings 
on  very  special  occasions,  such  as  the  consecration  of  the 
Guildhall  Lodge,  the  United  Wards  Lodge,  of  which  I  was 
one  of  the  Founders,  and  the  Canada  Lodge,  and  the 
notable  dinner  of  the  Chancery  Bar  Lodge  at  Lincoln's  Inn 
Hall  when  the  Grand  Master  the  Duke  of  Connaught  was 
present. 

In  1903  the  Duke  honoured  me  by  conferring  on  me  the 
rank  of  Past  Grand  Warden,  and  I  wore  my  purple  clothing 
for  the  first  time  at  a  great  gathering  of  Canadian  Masons 
who  entertained  me  at  Toronto  during  my  trip  through 
Canada  in  the  autumn  of  that  year.  In  1912  my  friends 
at  the  City  of  London  College  did  me  the  greater  honour 
of  founding  a  new  lodge,  calling  it  the  Sir  Edward  Clarke 
Lodge  (3601),  and  inviting  me  to  be  its  first  Master.  My 
good  old  friend  Sir  Edward  Letchworth,  whose  services  as 
Grand  Secretary  were  of  inestimable  value  to  English  Free- 

»  I  again  served  as  a  Steward,  forty-two  years  later,  at  the  great  Masonic 
gatherings  at  the  Albert  Hall  on  Saturday  and  Sunday  June  23rd  and  24th, 
1917.  to  celebrate  the  bicentenary  of  the  foundation  of  Grand  Lodge. 


I874-7J  FREEMASONRY  113 

masonry,  performed  the  ceremony  of  consecration,  and  I 
had  a  happy  year  of  office,  though  I  confess  it  was  not  easy 
to  regain  mastery  of  the  ritual  and  the  official  forms.  I 
have  done  several  things  which  I  hope  may  cause  my  name  to 
be  remembered  when  my  life's  work  here  is  ended  ;  perhaps 
the  Sir  Edward  Clarke  Lodge  will  be  the  most  lasting  of 
my  memorials.  For  I  cannot  imagine  any  changes  in  the 
political  or  social  condition  of  England  which  can  weaken 
the  strong  hold  which  Freemasonry  has  upon  our  people. 
I  trust  no  such  changes  may  take  place,  for  I  look  upon  our 
Masonic  Lodges  as  centres  of  a  powerful  influence  which  is 
constantly  having  effect  in  purifying  and  upholding  our 
national  character.  The  work  of  Masonry  is  essentially 
religious.  Its  teaching  has  indeed  no  relation  to  the 
doctrines  which  distinguish  and  divide  the  Churches.  But 
it  proclaims  at  every  meeting  its  reverence  for  the  Great 
Architect  of  the  Universe  ;  it  hymns  His  praises  ;  it  invokes 
His  blessing  upon  all  its  work  ;  it  teaches  in  all  its  formu- 
laries the  virtues  of  brotherly  love,  charity,  and  truth  ;  and 
the  solemn  obligations  by  which  its  members  are  bound 
together  are  only  special  sanctions  of  the  Divine  law  which 
bids  us  fear  God  and  love  our  neighbours.  I  do  not  say 
that  all  Masons  are  good  men,  but  no  bad  man  can  be  a 
good  Mason,  and  he  will  soon  leave  off  attending  Masonic 
lodges,  for  to  the  man  who  is  dishonest  or  immoral,  or 
covetous,  or  uncharitable  in  thought,  or  slanderous  in 
speech,  it  must  soon  be  intolerable  to  listen  to  the  noble 
teaching  of  the  Masonic  ritual.  A  full  clear  note  is  sounded 
in  every  hymn  and  every  response  in  which  he  joins,  and  to 
his  conscience  there  must  come  at  once  the  bitter  reproach 
of  insincerity  and  falsehood. 

From  1874  to  1877  my  life  was  uneventful,  but  very 
prosperous  and  happy.  In  1 872  we  had  left  our  very  humble 
home  in  the  Peckham  Park  Road  and  gone  to  a  much  larger 
house  called  Dagmar  Villa,  which  stood  in  a  pleasant  open 
position  at  the  corner  of  Dagmar  Road,  Camberwell,  and 
had  a  good  garden.  Here  for  five  years  I  had  that  full 
enjoyment  of  life  which  can  only  come  to  a  man  who  has 


114  MASONIC   AND   DOMESTIC          [CHAP,  xii 

good  health,  complete  domestic  happiness,  and  an  income 
steadily  increasing  from  year  to  year.  My  dear  little  wife 
was  at  woman's  most  charming  age ;  our  sweet  little  Mabel 
was  life  and  sunshine  to  the  house;  in  1875  another 
baby  girl  came  to  bring  us  fresh  joys ;  and  the  trouble  of 
financial  anxieties  had  wholly  passed  away.  In  1873  my 
fees  amounted  to  £1,152,  and  during  the  next  three  years 
they  increased  at  the  rate  of  £500  a  year  ;  the  figures  for 
the  successive  years  being  £1,566,  £2,225,  and  £2,650. 

I  was  now  saving  money  steadily,  my  life  was  insured 
for  £4,000,  and  as  year  after  year  went  on  we  surrounded 
ourselves  with  comforts  and  luxuries  which  had  been  un- 
known to  us  in  our  early  days  of  severe  economies.  We 
enlarged  our  circle  of  acquaintances.  We  went  often  to 
theatres  and  concerts.  I  began  to  buy  books  and  bronzes 
and  engravings. 

One  night  a  week  was  given  to  the  Amateur  Musical 
Society,  and  every  Saturday  a  small  private  whist-club  met 
at  the  house  of  one  or  other  of  the  members  who  took  his 
turn  in  providing  supper. 

I  look  back  on  those  peaceful  and  pleasant  years  as  a 
time  of  sweet  rest  and  contentment  when  the  first  steep 
climb  was  over  and  I  could  pause  and  take  breath  for  the 
heights  which  had  yet  to  be  scaled.  In  the  year  1875  a 
cloud  came  over  our  sunny  sky  in  the  illness  of  my  brother 
Joseph,  and  I  think  I  may  fitly  choose  this  place  to  tell  the 
story  of  an  episode  in  my  family  life  which  I  should  not  like 
to  leave  unrecorded.  My  brother,  who  was  four  years  my 
junior,  had  been  educated  at  the  City  of  London  School. 
Here  he  greatly  distinguished  himself.  In  1860  he  won  the 
David  Salomon  Scholarship  at  the  School,  of  £30  a  year, 
and  took  the  prize  for  Scripture.  In  1861  he  delivered 
the  Declamation  in  German  and  took  the  Scriptural  prize 
and  the  highest  prize  for  General  Proficiency  and  Good 
Conduct. 

In  1862  he  delivered  the  Declamation  in  French  and 
gained  the  Conquest  Gold  Medal ;  the  highest  prize  in 
English  ;  and  the  Carpenter  Club  prize  for  English  History. 


1874-7]  MY   BROTHER  JOSEPH  115 

In  1863  as  Captain  of  the  School  he  delivered  the  Decla- 
mation in  English  ;  and  took  the  Hale  Medal  for  Chemical 
Science,  the  Latin  Verse  Competition  Prize,  and  the  highest 
Prize  in  German  and  the  first  Shakespeare  Prize ;  and  left 
the  School  for  Magdalen  College,  Oxford,  with  the  Grocers' 
Company  Exhibition  of  £50  a  year  and  a  Natural  Science 
Demyship  of  £75,  and  the  declaration  by  Dr.  Mortimer,  the 
Headmaster,  that  he  was  the  best  classical  scholar  the  School 
had  ever  sent  out.  He  was  a  bright  fair-haired  active  lad 
of  seventeen,  of  a  singularly  sweet  and  lovable  disposition, 
frank,  generous,  full  of  industry  and  courage,  with  an  in- 
stinctive purity  of  thought  and  life,  giving  promise  of  a 
career  of  brilliant  usefulness.  All  loved  him ;  his  fond 
mother  looked  forward  to  a  future  in  which  all  his  gifts 
and  qualities  would  find  full  scope  in  the  ministry  of  the 
English  Church.  For  a  time  all  went  well,  and  his  Oxford 
life  was  full  of  enjoyment  for  himself  and  satisfaction  for 
his  friends.  But  presently  he  made  the  acquaintance  of 
Father  Comberbatch,  who  was  conducting  an  active  pro- 
paganda for  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  among  Oxford 
students,  and  in  the  autumn  of  1865  he  wrote  to  me  saying 
that  he  was  much  shaken  in  his  belief  in  the  teaching  of  the 
Anglican  Church,  and  that  he  was  seriously  thinking  of 
leaving  it  for  that  of  Rome. 

I  begged  him  to  pause  before  taking  such  a  step,  and 
obtained  his  promise  that  he  would  take  no  step  for  six 
months,  and  that  meanwhile  he  would  study  books,  some  of 
which  I  suggested,  on  the  Protestant  side  of  the  controversy, 
and  would  discuss  his  difficulties  with  those  who  were  better 
qualified  than  I  to  advise  and  direct  him.  He  kept  his 
promise,  and  at  the  end  of  the  time  he  told  me  that  his  mind 
was  made  up,  and  that  he  had  in  fact  been  received  into 
the  Church  of  Rome.  The  immediate  consequences  were 
very  sad.  The  authorities  of  Magdalen  College  passed  a 
new  regulation  by  which  no  one  was  permitted  to  hold  a 
College  sizarship  unless  he  attended  the  Chapel  services. 
My  brother  could  not  obtain  a  dispensation  permitting  him 
to  do  this,  and  he  was  obliged  to  leave  Oxford. 


n6  MASONIC   AND   DOMESTIC  [CHAP,  xn 

Unhappily  the  doors  of  his  home  were  closed  against  him. 
My  father  and  mother  were  Protestants  of  a  somewhat 
narrow  type,  and  they  were  sorely  angered. 

They  refused  even  to  see  him.  I  was  living  at  Moorgate 
Street  and  contributing  to  the  family  expenses,  and  could 
not  afford  to  keep  him,  and  in  his  despair  he  asked  the 
Passionist  Father  at  St.  Joseph's  Retreat,  Highgate,  to 
receive  him  as  a  postulant.  Here  he  was  most  kindly 
treated,  and  came  under  the  influence  of  Father  Pius,  a  man 
of  great  intellectual  and  personal  charm,  and  in  his  society 
my  brother  was  confirmed  in  his  new  faith,  and  found  some 
compensation  for  the  loss  of  the  congenial  surroundings  of 
Magdalen. 

In  due  time  he  passed  to  the  house  of  the  Order  at  Broad- 
way, Worcestershire,  there  to  serve  his  novitiate,  and  in 
1866  he  wrote  to  tell  me  that  he  had  been  accepted,  and 
was  to  make  his  profession  before  the  Bishop  of  Clifton,  and 
sent  me  an  invitation  from  Father  Salvian,  the  head  of  the 
house,  to  come  to  Broadway  and  be  present  at  his  reception 
into  the  Order. 

I  stayed  at  Broadway  for  three  days,  and  was  for  the 
greater  part  of  the  time  alone  with  my  brother,  and  I  urged 
him  if  he  had  any  doubts  as  to  Roman  Catholic  doctrines  or 
as  to  his  own  vocation  for  the  monastic  life  not  to  take  an 
irrevocable  step,  but  to  come  to  the  home  I  was  now  able 
to  offer  him.  He  had  no  doubts,  and  on  the  Sunday  I 
saw  him  make  his  profession.  For  a  time,  while  he  remained 
at  Broadway,  all  went  well,  but  presently  he  was  sent  to 
do  educational  work  at  the  house  of  the  Order  at  Harold's 
Cross,  Dublin.  There  his  faith  received  a  sudden  and 
violent  shock.  He  found  himself  in  a  religious  atmosphere 
in  which  his  refined  intellect  and  saintly  soul  could  hardly 
breathe.  He  was  among  priests  and  novices  and  postulants 
who  were  for  the  most  part  sons  of  Irish  peasants ;  and,  away 
from  the  sentimental  sophistries  and  subtle  evasions  by 
which  the  more  intellectual  Romanists  mask  and  evade  the 
difficulties  of  their  creed,  he  came  face  to  face  with  the  coarse 
and  ignorant  superstition  which  has  hindered  moral  and  in- 


1874^7]  A  SAD   ENDING 

tellectual  progress  in  every  Roman  Catholic  country.  He 
could  not  endure  the  strain,  and  after  a  year  or  two  of  great 
mental  suffering  he  determined  to  leave  the  Passionist  Order, 
and  obtained  from  Rome  a  release  from  his  monastic  vows. 
The  rest  of  his  life  was  full  of  sadness,  and  was  a  slow  but 
unbroken  course  of  mental  and  physical  failure.  He  tried 
many  occupations.  He  was  for  a  time  a  tutor  at  St. 
Edmund's  College ;  then  he  taught  in  a  private  family ; 
then,  with  an  old  school  friend,  he  prepared  candidates  for 
University  and  Civil  Service  examinations ;  for  a  time 
he  was  employed  in  a  music  publisher's  office.  Seeing 
him  often,  and  watching  him  with  anxious  affection,  I  SOOD 
became  aware  of  a  gradual  weakening  of  his  mental  and 
physical  powers.  His  steady,  hopeful  will  changed  into  a 
fitful  indecision,  sometimes  impetuous  and  sanguine,  some- 
times gloomy  with  despondency.  His  sweetness  of  affection 
and  his  gentle  charity  and  sympathy  for  others  never  failed  ; 
but  the  early  comfort  of  his  religious  faith  was  lost  in  a 
habit  of  constant  introspection,  full  of  anxiety  and  terror. 
At  length  there  came  a  crisis. 

One  evening  I  was  working  alone  in  my  room  at  Garden 
Court  when  I  heard  a  loud  and  hurried  knock  and  a  sound 
as  of  some  one  falling  in  the  passage.  I  opened  the  door, 
and  just  outside  it  I  found  my  poor  brother,  on  his  knees 
and  sobbing  as  if  his  heart  would  break.  I  got  him  into  the 
room,  and  then  he  told  his  sorrow.  He  had  that  afternoon 
been  riding  in  an  omnibus,  where,  after  he  entered,  there 
was  one  vacant  seat.  Two  ladies  wanted  to  come  in, 
and  the  conductor  asked  if  any  gentleman  would  ride  out- 
side and  so  give  them  room.  It  was  a  cold  wet  day ;  and 
my  brother  had  been  warned  that  his  chest  was  delicate, 
and  that  he  ought  to  run  no  risk.  So  he  sat  still,  as  others 
did,  and  the  ladies  were  left  outside  again.  Then  remorse 
and  terror  seized  him.  He  had  been  wanting  in  Christian 
charity.  Perhaps  the  danger  he  had  feared  for  himself 
might  bring  illness  or  death  to  one  or  both  of  them.  He 
rushed  down  to  the  Temple  to  find  me,  and  by  the  time  he 
reached  my  door  he  was  in  the  extremity  of  terror  lest  he 

9 


li8  MASONIC   AND   DOMESTIC  [CHAP,  xit 

should  die  in  this  mortal  sin  and  his  soul  be  eternally  lost. 
I  talked  to  him  and  tried  to  comfort  him,  and  to  some  extent 
succeeded  ;  but  from  that  time  I  felt  that  it  was  dangerous 
for  him  to  be  going  about  alone.  Indeed  he  felt  so  too  ;  he 
always  tried  to  get  a  companion  :  when  alone  he  hastened 
through  the  streets  as  if  pursued,  and  he  was  quite  unfit  for 
any  occupation.  A  very  able  and  high-minded  doctor  of 
my  acquaintance  kept  a  well-known  asylum  in  the  Peckham 
Road,  and  I  suggested  to  my  brother  that  he  should  be 
placed  there  as  a  patient.  After  a  little  hesitation  he  con- 
sented, and  one  sad  evening,  his  luggage  having  been  sent 
before,  we  walked  together  to  the  house,  and  I  left  him 
in  my  friend's  charge.  The  step  was  not  taken  a  week 
too  soon,  for  the  mind  was  fatally  impaired,  and  as  if  in 
sympathy  the  body  failed  also.  For  about  four  months 
in  1876  I  spent  several  hours  with  him  every  Sunday  after- 
noon. He  was  content  and  fairly  happy,  and  expressed 
no  desire  to  come  out  into  a  world  with  whose  tumultuous 
life  he  felt  himself  too  weak  to  cope.  And  gradually  the 
body  grew  feebler  and  the  mind  lost  its  power  of  consecutive 
thought.  By  the  end  of  the  year  he  was  scarcely  able  to 
leave  his  room,  and  the  doctor  told  me  he  did  not  think 
he  could  last  many  weeks.  So  I  took  him  to  the  house 
of  a  medical  man  at  Holloway,  where  he  was  near  the 
Passionist  Monastery,  from  which  the  priests  used  to  come 
to  see  him,  and  near  also  to  my  father's  house.  Here  he 
gradually  sank  into  occasional,  and  then  into  almost  con- 
tinuous, coma,  and  on  March  i8th,  1876,  while  my  sister 
Fanny  and  I  sat  by  his  bedside,  his  pure  and  gentle  spirit 
passed  away. 

I  have  said  before  that  the  only  way  to  make  sure  of  feeling 
wealthy  is  to  live  in  a  much  smaller  and  cheaper  house  than 
one  could  reasonably  afford,  and  notwithstanding  my  rapid 
increase  of  income  I  think  we  should  have  continued  to  live 
at  Dagmar  Villa  if  in  the  spring  of  1877  the  opportunity 
had  not  occurred  of  securing  the  pleasantest  house  in  the 
neighbourhood  I  did  not  wish  to  leave.  Huntingdon  Lodge 
was  a  well-built  square  house  of  about  seventeen  rooms, 


1874-7]  HUNTINGDON    LODGE  119 

standing  well  back  from  the  Peckham  Road,  with  a  large 
square  garden  at  the  back,  and  a  smaller  one,  but  with 
pleasant,  well-grown  trees,  at  the  side  of  the  house, 
and  filling  up  the  frontage  between  Southampton  Street 
and  Camden  Grove. 

It  was  just  the  house  which  would  suit  the  Member  for 
a  South  London  constituency ;  and  having  been  occupied 
for  many  years  by  Mr.  Waterlow,  the  father  of  Sir  Sydney 
Water  low,  who  was  Lord  Mayor  of  London  in  1872,  it  was 
in  excellent  condition.  I  took  it  at  Lady  Day,  1877,  at  a 
rent  of  £120  a  year,  and  we  spent  a  good  deal  of  money  in 
furnishing,  and  again  altered  the  standard  of  our  domestic 
expenditure.  In  June  1877  there  were  some  apprehensions 
that  the  campaign  which  Mr.  Gladstone  had  begun  in  the 
previous  year  on  the  subject  of  the  Bulgarian  atrocities 
might  imperil  the  Government  and  lead  to  an  early  General 
Election,  and  at  a  meeting  held  at  the  Hop  Exchange  in  the 
borough  on  July  6th  I  was  adopted  as  the  Conservative 
candidate  for  Southwark  if  a  dissolution  should  take  place. 

It  was  a  very  large  constituency  of  250,000  people,  with 
22,000  electors,  and  the  candidature  promised  to  be  a  very 
arduous  one,  partly  because  of  its  great  expense,  and  partly 
because  it  was  extremely  difficult  to  make  oneself  personally 
known,  or  even  known  by  name,  to  such  an  electorate. 
Again  my  good  fortune  was  shown,  and  two  cases  which 
came  to  me  quite  close  together  not  only  brought  me  an 
assured  success  in  my  profession,  but  were  of  a  character 
which  made  my  name  known  to  the  world  in  a  way  which 
nothing  else  could  have  secured  to  me. 


CHAPTER   XIII 

THE  PENCE  MYSTERY:  1877  l 

FROM  the  professional  point  of  view  the  most  important 
of  all  my  years  of  practice  at  the  Bar  was  the  year  1877. 
My  income  had  steadily  risen,  the  days  of  anxiety  as  to 
success  or  failure  had  gone  by ;  what  I  wanted  was  that 
now,  when  I  was  just  reaching  the  age  of  achievement,  when 
all  my  powers  were  at  their  fullest  strength,  I  should  have 
a  conspicuous  opportunity  of  showing  that  I  was  capable 
of  dealing  with  the  gravest  difficulties  and  responsibilities 
which  an  advocate  can  have  to  meet.  That  opportunity 
came  in  the  case  which  for  several  months  in  1877  was 
known  as  the  Penge  mystery. 

This  concerned  the  death  of  a  woman  named  Harriet 
Staunton,  one  of  the  two  daughters  of  a  Mrs.  Richardson. 
Mrs.  Richardson  was  the  illegitimate  child  of  one  Eleanor 
Suter,  who  many  years  after  her  daughter's  birth  married 
the  sixth  (and  last)  Baron  Rivers  of  Sudeley  Castle.  The 
elder  daughter  married  William  George  Howard,  the  heir- 
presumptive  to  the  Earldom  of  Wicklow,  and  after  his  death 
put  forward  a  boy  as  his  child,  and  made  an  unsuccessful 
claim  to  the  Earldom.  She  afterwards  married  a  Mr. 
Casabianca. 

Harriet  Richardson,  the  younger  sister,  had  always  been 
a  source  of  some  anxiety  to  her  mother.  Her  intellect  was 
weak ;  she  was  incapable  of  receiving  much  education, 
and  was,  in  her  mother's  opinion,  quite  unfit  for  marriage. 

At  the  death  of  Lady  Rivers,  which  took  place  in  1872, 

1  The  substance  of  this  chapter  is  taken  from  a  fuller  account  of  the 
Penge  case  which  appeared  in  The  Cornhill  Magazine  of  April  1915. 

120 


1877]  THE   STAUNTON    MARRIAGE  121 

each  of  the  two  sisters  became  entitled  to  money,  Harriet's 
share  being  about  £2,000  in  possession  and  about  the  same 
amount  in  reversion.  She  was  then  or  shortly  after  living 
with  some  relatives  in  the  south  of  London.  In  1874 
her  mother,  who  was  now  Mrs.  Butt erfi  eld,  having  after 
Richardson's  death  married  a  country  clergyman,  heard 
that  a  young  auctioneer's  clerk,  named  Louis  Staunton, 
who  was  twelve  years  younger  than  Harriet,  was  proposing 
to  marry  her.  She  at  once  made  an  attempt  to  have 
her  daughter  declared  a  lunatic,  and  her  money  placed 
under  the  protection  of  the  Court  of  Chancery ;  but  this 
attempt  was  unsuccessful  and  the  marriage  took  place 
in  June  1875.  The  newly  married  couple  went  to  live 
at  a  small  house  in  Loughborough  Road,  Brixton,  which 
had  been  furnished  with  part  of  Harriet's  money,  and 
there  a  few  weeks  later  Mrs.  Butterfield  paid  them  an 
unexpected  visit.  Both  husband  and  wife  were  at  home, 
and,  as  was  quite  natural  in  the  circumstances,  they  re- 
ceived her  very  coldly,  and  a  few  days  later  s*he  received 
letters  from  them  both,  asking  that  the  visit  should  not  be 
repeated.  She  never  after  that  saw  her  daughter  alive. 
From  time  to  time  she  made  inquiries  about  her,  and  a  year 
later  she  heard  that  the  house  in  Brixton  had  been  given 
up,  and  that  Harriet,  with  her  child,  who  had  been  born 
in  March  1876,  was  living  at  the  house  of  her  brother-in- 
law,  Patrick  Staunton,  at  Cudham  in  Kent.  Seriously 
uneasy,  she  made  several  attempts  to  find  her.  Happening 
to  meet  Patrick  Staunton  at  a  railway  station  she  asked 
where  her  daughter  was,  and  he  said  he  knew  nothing  about 
her.  Then,  in  March,  she  went  down  to  Cudham  and  found 
that  Mr.  and  Mrs.  Louis  Staunton  were  living  at  a  house 
called  "  The  Woodlands."  She  went  there  and  saw  Louis 
and  Mrs.  Patrick  Staunton  and  begged  to  be  allowed  to  see 
her  daughter.  She  was  told  that  Harriet  was  not  there. 
The  poor  mother  did  not  believe  this  ;  she  said  she  did  not 
want  to  talk  to  her  daughter,  but  just  to  see  her,  if  only  at 
a  distance,  to  be  assured  that  she  was  still  alive.  She  was 
driven  from  the  house  with  abuse  and  threats  of  violence, 


122  THE    PENGE    MYSTERY  [CHAP,  xm 

and  an  application  she  made  to  the  local  police  had  no 
result. 

Six  weeks  passed.  No  knowledge  of  her  whereabouts 
could  be  obtained.  And  then  a  strange  coincidence,  so 
strange  that  if  found  in  fiction  it  would  be  ridiculed  as  too 
improbable,  led  to  the  discovery  and  investigation  of  a  great 
tragedy.  On  the  evening  of  Friday,  April  I3th,  Mr.  Casa- 
bianca,  who  had  married  Mrs.  William  George  Howard,  had 
occasion  to  go  to  a  shop  at  the  corner  of  a  then  unfinished 
road  at  Penge,  called  Forbes  Road. 

Mr.  Casabianca  knew  nothing  about  the  Stauntons,  except 
that  his  wife's  sister  had  married  a  young  man  of  that  name, 
and  that  Mrs.  Butterfield  had  been  vainly  trying  to  ascertain 
her  whereabouts.  The  shop  was  the  local  post-office,  and, 
while  Mr.  Casabianca  was  doing  the  business  which  had 
brought  him  there,  a  young  man,  whom  he  had  never  seen 
before,  came  in  to  ask  where  a  death  which  had  occurred 
that  afternoon  in  Forbes  Road  would  have  to  be  registered. 
Forbes  Road  was  on  the  boundary  road  between  two  counties, 
the  houses  on  one  side  being  in  Kent,  and  those  on  the  other 
side  in  Surrey,  so  it  was  natural  that  inquiry  should  have 
to  be  made,  and  that  it  should  be  made  at  that  shop.  But 
the  young  man  was  needlessly  garrulous ;  and  one  quite 
unnecessary  statement  had  momentous  results.  He  said 
that  the  lady  whose  death  was  to  be  registered  had  been 
brought  from  Cudham.  That  word  reminded  Mr.  Casa- 
bianca that  it  was  at  Cudham  that  Mrs.  Butterfield  had 
made  inquiries,  and  he  acted  promptly. 

He  went  the  next  morning  to  the  police,  and  upon  his 
suggestion  inquiries  were  made.  The  doctor  who  had  given 
a  certificate  of  death  withdrew  it ;  the  coroner  ordered  an 
inquest,  and  on  April  igth  a  post-mortem  examination  was 
made  by  four  doctors  who  agreed  that  death  had  been 
caused  by  starvation. 

I  was  to  have  appeared  for  the  Stauntons  at  the  inquest, 
but  I  had  engagements  in  town,  and  Percy  Gye  went  down 
on  the  first  hearing  and  Douglas  Straight  was  taken  in  on 
the  second.  They  had  a  very  difficult  task,  for  when  the 


i877] 


HARRIET   STAUNTON 


123 


story  became  known  there  was  a  furious  outburst  of  public 
indignation.  When  the  Stauntons  attended  to  give  evidence 
before  the  coroner  they  were  with  difficulty  protected  from 
the  violence  of  the  crowd,  and  they  were  advised  by  their 
counsel  not  to  be  present  at  the  close  of  the  inquiry.  The 
violence  of  the  public  feeling  is  easily  understood  when  the 
facts  proved  at  the  inquest  are  narrated. 

For  rather  more  than  a  year  after  their  marriage  in  June 
1875  Mr.  and  Mrs.  Louis  Staunton  continued  to  live  at 
Brixton,  and  there  in  March  1876  a  little  son  was  born. 
About  that  time  a  pretty  girl  of  eighteen,  Alice  Rhodes, 
whose  sister  had  married  Patrick  Staunton,  came  to  live 
in  the  house,  and  Mrs.  Louis  soon  had  cause  to  suspect  that 
immoral  relations  existed  between  her  husband  and  this 
girl.  A  few  months  of  constant  quarrelling  and  unhappiness 
followed,  and  then  in  August  1876  Harriet  and  her  child 
were  sent  down  to  Cudham  in  Kent  to  live  with  Patrick 
Staunton  and  his  wife.  Patrick  was  an  artist  with  very 
small  means,  and  lived  in  a  little  cottage  of  only  four  or  five 
rooms.  A  little  later  Louis,  who  had  by  this  time  obtained 
and  spent  all  the  money  his  wife  had  inherited,  and  had 
induced  her  to  sell  her  reversionary  interests  and  let  him 
have  the  proceeds,  took  Alice  Rhodes  to  live  as  his  wife  at 
"  The  Woodlands,"  a  house  which  he  took  and  furnished 
only  a  mile  from  Patrick  Staunton' s  cottage.  From  that 
time  Harriet  Staunton  was  never  seen  except  by  Patrick 
Staunton  and  his  wife,  and  their  servant  Clara  Brown,  who 
was  a  first  cousin  of  Mrs.  Patrick  and  Alice  Rhodes,  and 
once  or  twice  accidentally  by  chance  visitors  to  the  house. 
The  neighbours  and  tradespeople  did  not  know  she  was 
living  there. 

Six  months  passed  by.  During  that  time  Harriet  Staun- 
ton only  left  the  house  twice — when  she  was  brought  to 
London  by  her  husband  to  make  her  declaration  as  a  married 
woman  respecting  the  deed  of  assignment  of  a  reversionary 
interest  to  which  she  had  become  entitled  on  the  death  of 
her  "  great-aunt,"  Lady  Rivers,  in  1872,  and  a  part  of 
which,  being  her  only  remaining  property,  was  now  sold  for 


124  THE   PENGE    MYSTERY  [CHAP,  xm 

£1,100.  Except  for  these  two  visits  to  London  she  was 
closely  confined  to  the  cottage ;  her  hat  and  shawl  were 
locked  up,  and  when  strangers  came  she  was  ordered  to  stay 
upstairs. 

On  the  afternoon  of  Sunday,  April  8th,  1877,  Mr.  and 
Mrs.  Patrick  Staunton  took  the  child  to  Guy's  Hospital,  and 
asked  that  it  might  be  taken  in,  as  its  mother  was  not  able 
to  take  care  of  it.  They  gave  their  own  address,  but  said 
the  boy's  name  was  Henry  Stormton,  and  that  its  father  was 
a  carpenter.  The  child  was  only  taken  in  by  the  house 
surgeon  because  he  saw  it  was  in  a  dying  condition.  It  died 
at  nine  o'clock  that  evening,  and  on  the  following  Tuesday, 
the  loth,  Louis  Staunton  gave  instructions  for  its  burial 
to  an  undertaker  in  South wark.  He  gave  his  own  name 
as  John  Harris,  and  said  that  he  represented  the  firm  where 
the  father  of  the  child  was  employed. 

On  Thursday,  April  I2th,  Louis  Staunton  and  Mrs. 
Patrick  Staunton  took  lodgings  in  Forbes  Road,  Penge,  for 
an  invalid  lady,  and  that  evening  Harriet  Staunton,  who 
was  now  too  ill  to  walk,  was  put  into  a  wagonette  at  Cudham 
and  driven  to  Bromley  station.  Thence  the  party,  con- 
sisting of  Louis  Staunton,  Patrick  Staunton  and  his  wife, 
and  Alice  Rhodes,  came  by  train  to  Penge,  and  the  sick 
woman  was  taken  in  a  cab  to  Forbes  Road,  and  carried  into 
the  lodgings. 

A  doctor  upon  whom  Louis  Staunton  had  called  that 
afternoon  was  then  sent  for,  but  he  was  out  and  did  not 
return  home  until  late ;  and  not  knowing  the  urgency  of 
the  case  he  did  not  go  round  that  night. 

Mrs.  Patrick  Staunton  and  her  sister  stayed  up  during 
the  night,  and  at  nine  o'clock  the  next  morning  Alice  Rhodes 
fetched  the  doctor.  He  found  Harriet  Staunton  insensible, 
the  arms  rigid,  one  eye  dilated,  the  other  greatly  contracted. 
A  nurse  was  immediately  procured,  and  the  doctor  paid  a 
second  visit,  but  the  invalid  never  recovered  consciousness, 
and  about  half-past  one  of  the  same  day  she  died.  The 
nurse  got  some  water  to  wash  the  body,  but  found  it  in  such 
S  filthy  state  that  she  coulc].  not  do  so,  It  was  caked  with 


1877]  POST-MORTEM   CONDITIONS  125 

dirt  that  could  not  be  washed  off  with  a  flannel.  There 
was  a  great  deal  of  hair  on  the  head  ;  it  had  not  been  combed 
or  brushed  for  so  long  a  time  that  it  was  full  of  lice,  and  had 
to  be  left  untouched. 

When  the  post-mortem  examination  was  made,  six  days 
later,  the  body  was  found  to  be  fearfully  emaciated  and 
filthily  dirty  all  over,  particularly  the  feet,  which  the  nurse 
had  not  examined.     The  skin  of  the  feet  was  quite  horny,  and 
the  feet  were  caked  with  dirt.     The  horny  condition  would 
be  produced  by  walking  for  some  time  without  shoes  or 
stockings.     The  height  of  the  body  was  5  feet  5J-  inches. 
The  ordinary  weight  in  a  woman  of  that  height  would  be 
between  nine  and  ten  stone.     Harriet  Staunton  was  thin, 
and  in  health  only  weighed  about  eight  stone ;    now  the 
body  weighed  only  5  st.  4  lb.,  and  the  internal  organs 
were  proportionally  small  and  light ;    there  was  tubercular 
deposit  at  the  apex  of  the  left  lung  and  upon  the  membranes 
of  the  brain.     The  congestion  of  the  upper  part  of  the 
stomach  and  of  the  brain  suggested  poison,  and  the  condition 
of  the  eyes  seemed  to  indicate  that  a  narcotic  had  been 
taken  or  administered  ;   but  an  analysis  negatived  the  idea 
of  poisoning,  and  the  conclusion  arrived  at  was  that  death 
had  been  caused  by  starvation.     There  was  a  darkening 
of  the  skin  which  suggested  Addi son's  disease  or  diabetes,  but 
the  only  certain  indication  of  the  presence  of  either  disease 
was  neglected,  for  the  urine  and  the  supra-renal  capsules 
were  not   examined.     Acting   on  his  observation   of  the 
symptoms  preceding  death  and  the  information  given  him 
by  the  Stauntons,  the  doctor  had  given  a  certificate  that  the 
cause  of  death  was  primarily  cerebral  disease,  and  secondly, 
apoplexy ;  an  undertaker  had  been  called  in,  and  the  funeral 
arranged  for  the  following  Monday.     If  it  had  not  been  for 
the  mention  of  Cudham  in  Louis  S  taunt  on' s  careless  con- 
versation at  the  post-office  that  funeral  would  have  closed 
the  story  of  Harriet  Staunton,  and  the  famous  Penge  case 
would  never  have  been  heard  of. 

On  May  igth  the  coroner's  jury  gave  a  verdict  of  wilful 
murder  against  the  three  Stauntons  and  Alice  Rhodes,  and 


126  THE   PENGE    MYSTERY  [CHAP.XIII 

at  the  Kent  Assizes  in  July  a  true  bill  was  found  by  the 
grand  jury  after  a  very  able  charge  by  Sir  James  Stephen, 
who  laid  much  stress  upon  the  distinction  which  should  be 
drawn  between  the  case  against  Alice  Rhodes  and  that 
against  the  Stauntons  in  whose  care  Harriet  had  been. 
The  indictment  was  removed  for  trial  to  the  Central  Criminal 
Court  upon  proof  of  the  strong  feeling  against  the  prisoners 
in  the  county  of  Kent,  and  came  on  for  trial  at  the  Old 
Bailey  before  Mr.  Justice  Hawkins  on  September  igth. 

Alice  Rhodes  had  on  July  28th  given  birth  in  Maid- 
stone  Gaol  to  a  boy  who  was  registered  as  the  son  of  Louis 
Staunton. 

Sir  John  Holker  (Attorney-General),  Sir  Hardinge  Giffard 
(Solicitor-General),  and  Mr.  Poland  conducted  the  prosecu- 
tion ;  Montagu  Williams  and  Charles  Mathews  appeared  for 
Louis  Staunton ;  I  defended  Patrick  Staunton.  Douglas 
Straight  and  H.  F.  Purcell  were  for  Mrs.  Patrick,  and  Percy 
Gye  had  what  was  believed  to  be  by  far  the  easier  task 
of  defending  Alice  Rhodes.  We  were  all  members  of  the 
junior  Bar,  and  were  all  instructed  by  Lewis  and  Lewis. 

Our  briefs  were  delivered  in  July,  as  it  was  expected  that 
the  trial  would  come  on  at  the  August  session,  and  we  had 
a  full  consultation  together,  and  it  was  agreed  that  the 
medical  part  of  the  case  should  be  left  entirely  to  me,  an 
arrangement  which  was  loyally  adhered  to  by  my  colleagues 
throughout  the  trial.  I  gave  up  the  greater  part  of  my 
intended  holiday  to  working  hard  at  the  study  of  works 
upon  tuberculosis,  and  upon  the  post-mortem  appearances 
which  would  be  expected  where  death  had  taken  place  from 
starvation.  At  the  trial  I  had  unexpected  and  very  valu- 
able help.  At  the  house  of  my  old  friend  and  early  client, 
Mr.  George  Marsden,  the  Vestry  Clerk  of  Camberwell,  I  had 
met  Dr.  J.  S.  Bristowe,  a  very  distinguished  physician  who 
was  at  that  time  Senior  Physician  to  St.  Thomas's  Hospital 
and  Examiner  to  the  College  of  Surgeons.  He  wrote  me  a 
private  letter  expressing  a  strong  opinion  that  the  post- 
mortem appearances  described  by  those  who  had  made  the 
examination  indicated  that  death  had  been  caused  by 


1877]  SIR   JOHN   HOLKER  127 

tubercular  disease  and  not  by  starvation.  Then  he  came 
to  see  me  in  consultation  ;  assisted  me  by  his  suggestions 
as  to  my  cross-examination  of  the  witnesses  for  the  prose- 
cution ;  and  finally  came  into  the  witness-box,  and  concurred 
with  Dr.  Payne,  a  very  distinguished  pathologist,  in  giving 
evidence  which,  although  it  was  practically  ignored  by  the 
Judge,  had  a  great  effect  on  the  mind  of  the  medical  pro- 
fession, and  was  the  chief  cause  of  the  remarkable  protest 
which  subsequently  caused  the  setting  aside  of  the  death 
sentence. 

My  pleasantest  memory  of  this  terrible  case  connects 
with  the  Attorney-General.  Sir  John  Holker  was  a  powerful 
advocate,  and  one  of  the  kindest  and  most  generous  of  men. 
Tall  and  massive  in  person,  slow  and  deliberate  in  move- 
ment and  in  speech,  there  was  a  stately  simplicity  in  his 
manner  and  his  diction  which  was  far  more  effective  than 
the  dramatic  gesture  and  ornate  rhetoric  of  some  of  his 
contemporaries.  His  phrases,  spoken  in  a  full  richly-toned 
voice,  were  made  more  musical  by  the  slight  northern  accent 
which  broadened  all  the  vowel  sounds.  But  his  great 
strength  as  an  advocate  lay  in  his  instinctive  and  conspicuous 
fairness  to  his  opponents.  This  inspired  such  confidence  in 
him  in  judges  and  in  juries  that  in  his  day  he  was  almost 
irresistible  on  the  Northern  Circuit.  His  death  in  1882, 
at  the  early  age  of  fifty-four,  when  he  had  only  just  been 
made  a  Lord  Justice,  was  a  heavy  loss  to  the  country. 

I  last  saw  him  early  in  that  year  on  the  sea-front  at 
Brighton.  He  was  in  a  bath-chair,  and  his  beautiful  and 
devoted  wife  was  walking  by  his  side.  She  gave  up  her 
place  to  me  for  a  while.  It  was  a  lovely  spring  day,  and  I 
expressed  a  hope  that  he  was  enjoying  the  sunshine.  "  Ah, 
my  dear  Clarke,"  said  he,  "a  dying  man  does  not  enjoy 
anything." 

In  the  Penge  case,  and  the  Detective  case  which  so  soon 
followed  it,  Sir  John  Holker  gave  to  the  group  of  younger 
men  who  appeared  for  the  defence  a  splendid  example  of 
how  a  prosecution  should  be  conducted,  and  I  hope  the 
lesson  was  not  lost  on  any  of  us,  especially  on  me  who  came, 


128  THE    PENCE    MYSTERY  [CHAP,  xm 

nine  years  later,  to  the  responsibilities  of  a  Law  Officer  of 
the  Crown. 

Apart  from  questions  of  medical  science  the  most  import- 
ant evidence  in  the  case  was  given  by  Clara  Brown,  who 
described  the  treatment  and  condition  of  Harriet  Staunton 
while  she  was  at  Cudham.  Before  the  coroner  Clara  Brown 
swore  that  she  went  about  the  house  and  out  of  the  house 
quite  freely ;  that  she  was  clean  and  always  well  fed  and 
clothed ;  that  she  knew  her  husband  was  living  a  little 
way  off  with  Alice  Rhodes,  who  passed  as  his  wife ;  and 
that  she  was  in  good  health  until  a  few  days  before  she  was 
taken  to  Penge.  This  account  had  been  corroborated  by 
the  Stauntons  and  Alice  Rhodes  in  their  depositions.  At 
the  trial  Clara  Brown  made  a  very  different  statement. 
She  said  that  her  previous  story  was  wholly  untrue  and  had 
been  dictated  by  the  prisoners  ;  and  she  now  gave  a  terrible 
account  of  neglect,  cruelty,  and  starvation.  The  putting 
in  of  the  prisoners'  depositions  before  the  coroner  told 
heavily  against  them. 

On  Saturday,  the  fourth  day  of  the  trial,  the  evidence 
for  the  prosecution  was  closed,  and  I  went  down  to  Brighton 
for  a  little  fresh  air,  and  to  finish  the  preparation  of  my 
speech.  They  had  been  very  trying  days.  The  evident 
bias  of  the  Judge,  and  his  persistent  unfairness,  were  in 
striking  contrast  to  the  moderation  and  scrupulous  fairness 
of  the  Attorney-General,  and  made  the  very  difficult  task 
of  the  counsel  for  the  defence  almost  hopeless.  With  any 
judge  and  any  jury  the  conviction  of  three  of  the  prisoners 
for  manslaughter,  if  not  for  the  graver  crime  of  murder, 
was  quite  inevitable,  and  the  special  duty  of  the  Judge  was 
to  take  care  that  the  case  against  Alice  Rhodes  was  separately 
considered,  and  that  the  medical  evidence,  upon  which 
the  doubt  arose  whether  the  graver  crime  had  been  in  fact 
committed,  should  be  carefully  examined.  Neither  of  these 
duties  was  discharged ;  they  were  not  even  attempted. 

I  hope  I  may  be  forgiven  for  quoting  the  peroration  of  my 
speech.  Forty  years  have  passed  since  it  was  spoken, 
and  I  believe  I  can  now  judge  it  with  the  impartial  detach- 


1877]  A    PERORATION  129 

ment  of  old  age.  I  think  that  in  its  personal  appeal  to  the 
hearers,  which  covers  an  argument  that  is  maintained  to 
the  very  last  sentence,  it  more  nearly  realised  my  ideal  of 
what  a  peroration  should  be  than  did  the  closing  passage 
of  any  other  speech  I  ever  made. 

Now,  gentlemen,  I  believe  that  I  have  almost  finished  the 
observations  that  I  have  to  make  to  you.  I  urge  upon  you 
that  there  is  no  evidence  which  would  justify  you  in  bringing 
a  verdict  of  guilty  of  murder  against  the  man  for  whom  I 
appear  in  this  case.  And  I  do  urge  upon  you  most  seriously, 
in  asking  for  your  anxious  consideration,  that  there  is  no 
evidence  that  he  is  guilty  of  the  crime  of  manslaughter.  I 
am  anxious  to  urge  this  upon  you,  for  I  beg  you  not  to  look 
upon  it  as  if  manslaughter  were  a  crime  involved  or  neces- 
sarily to  be  decided  by  the  other.  When  you  have  dis- 
missed, as  I  hope  you  will  dismiss,  the  charge  of  murder 
against  him,  it  is  for  you  then  carefully  to  consider  whether 
there  is  evidence  against  him  of  this  negligence,  and  care- 
lessness, and  recklessness,  as  to  which  my  lord  will  direct 
you.  I  have  no  desire  to  anticipate  a  phrase  which  would 
entitle  you  to  find  a  verdict  of  manslaughter.  Is  not  there 
only  the  mistake — the  honest  mistake  of  which  I  have 
spoken,  the  mistake  for  which  he  has  suffered  the  most 
terrible  punishment,  to  be  for  months  in  gaol  awaiting  his 
trial  for  life,  to  know  that  while  he  lay  in  one  cell  of  that 
gaol,  in  another  cell  of  that  shameful  birthplace  his  wife  is 
bringing  forth  the  child  of  their  love ;  to  have  to  give  up 
everything  that  he  possesses  to  supply  the  means  of  facing 
a  criminal  trial  like  this  ;  to  sit — I  was  about  to  forget  the 
worst  of  all — to  have  to  sit  for  five  or  six  days  listening  to 
these  discussions  going  on,  and,  I  fear  very  much,  thinking 
now  and  then  how  much  was  being  left  unsaid  that  should 
be  said  for  him,  how  much  was  being  left  unasked  that 
might  have  brought  an  answer  in  his  favour  ? 

All  this  would  have  been  to  him  an  insupportable  agony, 
it  would  have  constituted  to  me  in  this  trial  a  responsibility 
almost  too  great  to  bear,  if  he,  and  I  as  his  advocate,  had 
not  been  sustained  by  the  knowledge  of  the  way  in  which 
a  jury  deals  with  a  question  of  life  and  death.  Gentlemen, 
in  a  case  of  this  kind,  would  you  venture  as  Christian  men 
to  pronounce  a  verdict  of  guilty  unless  you  were  satisfied 
beyond  reasonable  doubt,  by  evidence  which  was  accurate, 


130 


THE    PENCE    MYSTERY 


[CHAP,  xin 


and  clear,  and  trustworthy,  and  satisfied  you  to  the  hilt  of 
the  matters  which  were  alleged,  and  with  which  you  were 
asked  to  deal  ?  Will  you  venture  to  rely  thoroughly  upon 
the  controverted  conclusions  of  the  doctors  who  have  dealt 
with  the  medical  evidence,  or  upon  the  shameless  evidence 
of  that  girl  who  came  into  the  witness-box  admitting  herself 
a  perjurer  before  the  coroner,  and  proclaiming  herself  in 
this  court  to  be  the  accomplice  in  the  crime  she  denounces  ? 
Gentlemen,  human  justice  is  depicted  as  blind.  It  is  not 
given  to  human  justice  to  see  and  to  know,  as  the  great 
Eternal  knows,  the  thoughts  and  feelings  and  actions  of 
all  men.  She  has  to  depend  on  what  she  hears.  She  must 
depend  on  recollection.  She  must  depend  on  testimony. 
She  must  depend  on  inferences.  How  should  she  deal  with 
the  irrevocable  issues  of  life  and  death  unless  those  recol- 
lections are  exact,  that  testimony  trustworthy,  those  in- 
ferences uncontradicted  ?  How  should  she  lift  the  sword  to 
strike — and  you,  gentlemen,  guide  her  hand  to-day — while 
at  the  moment  that  the  accusing  voice  is  in  her  ear  de- 
nouncing the  crime  the  echo  of  that  very  voice  is  heard 
proclaiming  that  the  prisoners  are  innocent,  and  when 
passionless  science  steps  to  her  side  to  warn  her  that  there 
may  have  been  in  truth  no  crime  committed  ? 

No  one  who  spent  the  long  hours  of  Wednesday,  Sep- 
tember 26th,  1877,  in  the  Central  Criminal  Court  could  ever 
forget  that  day.  Public  feeling  had  been  greatly  excited 
by  the  reports  of  the  trial,  and  long  before  the  Court  sat  a 
restless  crowd  was  moving  up  and  down  the  Old  Bailey. 
When  at  half-past  ten  the  Judge  took  his  seat  every  corner 
of  the  Court  was  filled,  and  well-dressed  women,  favoured 
occupants  of  the  choicest  seats,  stared  through  lorgnettes 
and  opera-glasses  at  the  four  pale  and  weary  creatures 
who  came  to  their  places  in  the  dock.  Then  began  the 
strangest  summing-up  that  was  ever  heard  in  a  criminal 
case.  Speaking  in  a  gentle,  clear,  beautifully  modulated 
voice,  the  Judge  set  himself  to  recapitulate  all  the  facts, 
however  trivial  and  unimportant,  which  had  been  related 
in  the  evidence  of  the  last  four  days.  As  an  exhibition  of 
tenacious  and  exact  memory  it  was  wonderful.  The  narra- 
tive was  complete  and  perfectly  arranged.  But  of  the 


1877]  THE   SUMMING-UP  131 

judicial  fairness  which  should  characterise  a  summing-up, 
especially  in  so  grave  a  case  as  this,  there  was  not  the 
slightest  trace ;  there  was  constant  emphasis  upon  the 
facts  which  told  against  the  prisoners,  and  every  point 
which  had  been  made  in  their  favour  was  answered,  or 
turned  aside  as  being  of  no  importance. 

All  the  morning  the  stream  of  fact  and  comment  went 
slowly  on,  and  when  the  luncheon  hour  came  three  hours 
had  only  brought  the  narrative  to  the  date  when  Harriet 
Staunton,  six  months  before  her  death,  paid  her  last  visit 
to  her  solicitor  in  London. 

The  worst  instance  of  the  Judge's  unfairness  was  to  come 
later  in  the  way  he  dealt  with  the  medical  evidence.  That 
raised  the  gravest  issue  in  the  case,  and  almost  one-half  of 
the  time  spent  by  the  Attorney-General  in  his  reply  in  dis- 
cussion of  the  facts  was  devoted  to  its  consideration.  During 
the  half-hour  allowed  for  lunch  Montagu  Williams  came  to 
me  and  said  :  "  Hawkins  wants  to  know  if  you  wish  him  to 
deal  with  the  medical  evidence,  and  says  that  if  he  does  he 
will  have  to  make  some  serious  observations  which  will  not 
help  you."  I  said :  "  That  is  not  a  question  for  me  to 
answer  :  I  have  done  my  duty :  the  responsibility  for  the 
summing-up  is  with  the  Judge,  not  with  me."  Sir  Henry 
scarcely  dealt  with  that  evidence  at  all :  of  the  forty-two 
pages  which  are  occupied  by  the  summing-up  in  the  full 
report  of  the  trial  less  than  a  single  page  is  given  to  the 
medical  question  on  which  so  much  important  evidence  had 
been  produced. 

The  day  dragged  on.  The  afternoon  sun  looked  in  through 
the  large  west  window  above  the  jury-box,  and  made  the 
closely  shut  court  more  stuffy,  and  the  listeners  more  drowsy, 
as  hour  by  hour  the  monotonous  murmur  of  the  untiring 
voice  went  on.  Sunshine  had  gone  when  four  more  hours 
had  only  brought  the  story  to  the  arrival  at  Penge,  and  the 
conflict  of  medical  opinion  had  not  been  touched  when  the 
Judge  suggested  a  short  adjournment,  and  the  jury  were 
allowed  a  quarter  of  an  hour's  respite.  Then,  soon  after 
six  o'clock  the  murmur  began  again,  and  for  three  hours 


I32  THE   PENCE   MYSTERY  [CHAP. 

and  a  half  no  other  sound  was  heard.  At  last  came  the 
finish,  and  the  jury,  tired  and  almost  dazed,  wearily  went  out 
to  their  deliberation.  Theirs  was  a  task  which  should  have 
been  performed  when  the  memory  and  judgement  were  clear 
and  active ;  when  the  mind  was  fully  capable  of  drawing 
the  conclusions  and  distinctions  on  which  the  verdict 
depended.  I  thought  then,  and  I  think  now,  writing  forty 
years  later,  that  only  a  wicked  judge  would  have  sent  out 
a  jury  at  nearly  ten  o'clock  at  night,  exhausted  by  sitting 
in  one  place  for  nearly  eleven  hours  listening  to  a  single 
voice,  to  consider  a  verdict  involving  the  lives  of  four 
human  beings,  whose  cases  required  separate  consideration, 
and  against  whom  popular  feeling  had  been  so  strongly 
excited  and  expressed  that  only  the  greatest  care  could 
secure  for  them  a  calm  and  considerate  judgment ;  and,  in 
the  case  of  Alice  Rhodes,  without  the  least  attempt  to  warn 
them  that  the  evidence  against  her,  as  Sir  James  Stephen 
had  pointed  out  in  charging  the  grand  jury,  upon  whose 
finding  of  a  true  bill  the  prisoners  were  being  arraigned, 
was  of  the  slightest  possible  kind. 

The  jury  were  out  for  an  hour  and  a  half.  It  was  a  strange 
and  terrible  sight  when  we  went  back  into  the  court.  Its 
sides  and  corners  and  roof  were  deep  in  shadow ;  the  in- 
sufficient gas-light,  feebly  helped  by  candles  which  flared 
and  guttered  here  and  there,  only  faintly  lighted  the  front 
row  of  the  counsel,  and  the  faces  of  the  four  prisoners,  and 
the  jurymen  coming  back  to  their  seats. 

"  Gentlemen  of  the  jury,  have  you  agreed  upon  your 
verdict?"— "We  have." 

"  Do  you  find  the  prisoner  Louis  Adolphus  Edmund 
Staunton  guilty  of  the  murder  of  which  he  stands  indicted, 
or  not  guilty  ?  "—•"  Guilty/' 

All  eyes  are  turned  at  once  towards  the  dock.  Ever  since 
two  o'clock  that  afternoon  a  doctor  had  sat  at  Louis 
Staunton' s  elbow ;  the  strange  grey  ashen  colour  of  the 
prisoner's  face  seemed  to  threaten  a  collapse.  Now  the  face 
may  be  a  shade  whiter,  the  hands  grip  the  front  of  the  dock 
but  that  is  all. 


1877]  THE  DEATH  SENTENCE  133 

"  Do  you  find  the  prisoner  Patrick  Llewellyn  Staunton 
guilty  of  the  murder  of  which  he  stands  indicted,  or  not 
guilty  ?  "— "  Guilty." 

As  the  word  is  spoken  Mrs .  Patrick  catches  at  her  hus- 
band's hand.  In  a  strange  broken  voice,  half  scream  and 
half  a  gasp,  she  cries  out :  "We  can  bear  it,  for  we  know 
it  is  not  true."  I  think  she  scarcely  heard  the  question 
about  herself  or  the  answer,  Guilty. 

"  Do  you  find  the  prisoner  Alice  Rhodes  guilty  of  the 
murder  of  which  she  stands  indicted,  or  not  guilty  ?  " — 
"Guilty." 

There  is  a  slight  shiver  in  the  court,  a  little  sob  of  com- 
passion as  the  girl  falls  back  fainting  into  her  chair. 

"  The  jury  recommend  both  female  prisoners  to  mercy, 
and  we  strongly  recommend  Alice  Rhodes." 

Then  in  pitiless  tones  the  Judge  pronounces  the  sentence 
of  death.  He  tells  them  that  they  plotted  together  to 
commit  a  crime  so  black  and  hideous  that  he  believes  in  all 
the  records  of  crime  it  would  be  difficult  to  find  its  parallel. 
Then  he  puts  the  finishing  touch  to  the  iniquity  of  his  own 
behaviour  by  telling  them  that  he  is  satisfied  (although  no 
evidence  had  been  given)  that  they  contemplated  and 
brought  about  the  death  of  Harriet  Staunton' s  infant  child. 

As  he  spoke  we  could  hear  the  exultant  shouts  of  the 
crowd  which,  although  it  was  nearing  midnight,  still  waited 
in  the  neighbouring  streets. 

The  misconduct  of  the  Judge  saved  the  prisoners'  lives. 
The  indignant  protests  of  Charles  Reade  and  Clement  Scott 
might  not  have  availed,  but  when  The  Lancet  made  a  strong 
appeal  to  the  medical  profession,  and  four  hundred  doctors, 
with  Sir  William  Jenner  at  their  head,  signed  a  declaration 
that  they  were  convinced  that  the  morbid  appearances 
observed  in  the  post-mortem  examination  of  Harriet 
Staunton' s  body  were  such  as  to  indicate  death  from  cerebral 
disease,  and  that  the  symptoms  recorded  during  life,  and 
especially  those  immediately  preceding  death,  were  not 
symptoms  of  starvation  but  were  the  usual  and  charac- 
teristic symptoms  of  certain  forms  of  disease  of  the 
10 


134  THE   PENCE   MYSTERY  [CHAP,  xin 

brain,  it  became  clear  that  the  death  penalty  could  not 
be  inflicted,  and  on  October  I4th  the  prisoners  were 
reprieved. 

A  little  later  Alice  Rhodes  was  set  free,  and  the  sentence 
on  the  others  was  commuted  to  penal  servitude  for  life. 
I  may  as  well  complete  the  story.  Patrick  Staunton  died  in 
prison  not  long  after  his  conviction.  His  wife  was  released 
after  a  few  years,  and  in  another  name  found  an  occupation 
in  which  she  made  herself  a  prosperous  position.  In  1897  a 
relative  of  Louis  Staunton  called  to  see  me  and  said  that  he 
was  about  to  be  released,  and  asked  if  I  would  do  anything 
to  help  him  in  earning  a  living.  I  said  I  should  like  to  see 
him,  and  presently  there  came  to  my  chambers  a  middle- 
aged  man,  with  subdued  voice  and  gentle  manner,  whom  of 
course  I  could  not  recognise.  I  had  a  long  interview  with 
him,  for  I  was  curious  to  know  what  sort  of  impression 
twenty  years  of  penal  servitude  would  leave  upon  a  man. 
Upon  him  it  seemed  to  have  left  no  impression  at  all.  He 
never  once  spoke  of  it  as  having  involved  suffering,  and 
there  was  only  one  incident  in  the  whole  of  the  twenty 
years  which  seemed  to  have  fixed  itself  in  his  mind  as  a 
subject  of  painful  recollection.  He  told  me  that  when  he 
was  at  Portland,  rather  early  in  the  time,  he  one  day  passed 
in  front  of  the  Governor  when  he  was  speaking  to  some  one. 
The  Governor  caught  him  by  the  shoulder  and  flung  him 
down,  and  in  falling  he  struck  his  head  against  a  table  and 
cut  it  rather  badly.  He  said  he  resolved  to  complain  of 
the  Governor,  but  was  advised  not  to  do  so,  and  that  he 
followed  the  advice  and  was  glad  afterwards  that  he  acted 
upon  it.  So  far  as  I  could  gather  this  was  the  only  event 
in  the  whole  twenty  years  which  had  left  on  his  mind  the 
remembrance  of  hardship  or  suffering.  I  found  he  wanted 
to  be  employed  in  his  relative's  business,  and  I  said  I  would 
either  give  him  £2  a  week  for  two  years,  which  I  thought 
the  best  way  to  secure  him  from  want,  or  I  would  give  him 
£100  at  once  which  he  could  put  in  the  business  he  proposed 
to  join. 

The  £100  was  about  the  same  as  the  amount  of  the 


1877]  SIR   HENRY    HAWKINS  135 

fees  I  had  received  in  the  case,  which  had  brought  me  great 
rewards.  He  chose  the  capital  sum,  joined  his  relative, 
and  worked  in  that  business  for  two  or  three  years.  When 
I  last  saw  him,  about  seven  years  later,  he  was  married 
and  had  a  child,  and  was  in  business  for  himself  in  the  name 
he  had  assumed  when  he  left  the  gaol,  and  he  was  doing  well. 

Sir  Henry  Hawkins  continued  his  career  of  public  dis- 
service. There  were  other  cases,  notably  the  Hansard 
Union  case,  the  Portsea  Island  Building  Society  case,  and 
the  Salisbury  Baby  case,  in  which  his  worst  characteristics 
were  shown,  and  when  he  retired  in  1898  I  wrote  to  Sir 
Richard  Webster,  the  Attorney-General,  to  say  that  if  it 
were  proposed  to  follow  in  his  case  the  very  mischievous 
practice  which  had  then  sprung  up  of  having  a  public  leave- 
taking  at  which  the  Attorney-General  made  a  complimentary 
speech  attributing  all  sorts  of  virtue  to  the  retiring  judge, 
I  should  make  a  public  protest. 

The  protest  did  not  become  necessary,  for  Sir  Henry 
went  one  afternoon  to  the  Middle  Temple  Hall,  and  there 
took  leave  of  his  friends. 


CHAPTER    XIV 

THE   DETECTIVE   CASE  :    1877  1 

ON  the  day  that  Harriet  Staunton  died  at  Penge  and  Louis 
made  his  disastrous  mention  of  Cudham  at  the  local  post- 
office,  Baron  Huddleston  at  the  Old  Bailey  began  the  trial 
of  the  actors  in  what  was  known  as  the  Great  Turf  Fraud. 
In  the  latter  part  of  1876  a  group  of  swindlers,  all  well 
known  to  the  police,  had  carried  out  a  singular^  elaborate 
and  daring  scheme  of  plunder.  They  sent  by  post  to 
wealthy  persons  in  France  a  sham  newspaper,  which  told 
the  story  of  a  Mr.  Montgomery  who  had  such  wonderful 
knowledge  and  judgment  in  racing  matters  that  the  book- 
makers, who  had  already  lost  to  him  half  a  million  of  money, 
would  not  take  his  bets,  and  so  compelled  him  to  speculate 
by  indirect  methods.  He  asked  his  foreign  friends  to  help 
him  by  sending  to  certain  bookmakers  whom  he  would 
name  cheques  which  he  would  provide,  for  bets  on  the  horses 
he  wished  to  back.  There  would  be  no  risk  whatever,  and 
those  who  were  good  enough  to  do  him  this  service  should 
have  10  per  cent,  of  his  winnings.  They  could  also  back 
these  horses  on  their  own  account,  thus  having  the  advantage 
of  his  advice. 

The  conspirators,  under  various  aliases,  took  rooms  in 
different  postal  districts  in  the  West  End  of  London  and 
played  the  part  of  the  bookmakers  with  whom  the  bets  were 
to  be  made.  A  thousand  cheques  were  printed  and  stamped 
bearing  the  name  of  a  non-existent  bank,  and  were  sent 
out  to  the  would-be  investors,  and  by  them  forwarded  to 

1  A  fuller  account  of  this  case  appeared  in  The  Cornhill  Magazine  for 
August  1915. 

136 


1877]  POLICE   COMPLICITY  137 

the  sham  bookmakers.  The  bait  took.  So  many  persons 
were  anxious  to  secure  the  whole  profit  instead  of  only 
10  per  cent,  that,  with  the  sham  cheques  which  they  them- 
selves provided,  the  swindlers  received  real  cheques  for 
bets  on  the  selected  horses,  and  in  the  course  of  a  single 
month  they  had  netted  about  £15,000. 

The  fraud  was  soon  discovered,  and  on  September  25th  a 
solicitor  named  Abrahams,  who  practised  in  London  and 
Paris,  went  to  Scotland  Yard,  where  the  case  was  put  into 
the  hands  of  the  Chief  Inspector  Druscovich,  one  of  the 
ablest  and  most  trusted  members  of  the  detective  force, 
who  had  been  in  the  service  sixteen  years,  and  had  earned 
rapid  promotion  and  several  special  rewards. 

The  ingenuity  of  the  scheme  was  remarkable,  but  still 
more  remarkable  was  the  fact  that  although  the  men  con- 
cerned and  their  residences  and  their  haunts  were  quite 
well  known  to  the  police  it  was  not  until  December  that 
any  arrest  was  made.  During  the  interval  the  swindlers 
travelled  about  England  and  Scotland,  making  hardly  any 
attempt  at  concealment,  and  spending  freely  the  money 
that  had  come  to  their  hands.  Eventually  in  April  1877 
they  were  convicted  before  Baron  Huddleston,  and  were 
sentenced  to  long  terms  of  penal  servitude. 

Evidence  given  at  the  trial  showed  quite  clearly  that 
they  must  have  been  assisted  by  the  police  officers  who 
had  been  employed  to  arrest  them,  and  soon  after  their 
conviction  the  conspirators  made  statements  which  in- 
volved four  of  the  most  important  members  of  the  Scotland 
Yard  detective  force.  They  alleged  that  Druscovich  had 
from  time  to  time  given  them  information  as  to  the  com- 
plaints which  were  made,  and  the  numbers  of  the  bank 
notes  which  were  stopped,  and  had  actually  met  one  of 
them  by  appointment  in  Edinburgh  on  November  loth, 
and  had  arranged  to  delay  his  journey  to  the  place  where 
they  had  been  staying,  so  as  to  enable  them  to  get  clear 
away.  They  said  that  another  trusted  detective  named 
Meiklejohn  had  been  in  their  pay  for  several  years,  and 
had  given  them  information  as  to  complaints,  had  warned 


138  THE   DETECTIVE   CASE  [CHAP,  xiv 

them  when  it  was  decided  to  apply  for  warrants,  had  some- 
times succeeded  in  stopping  inconvenient  inquiries,  and 
had  during  the  very  ineffectual  pursuit  of  this  autumn 
advised  them  as  to  the  best  means  of  avoiding  capture. 
They  also  alleged  that  George  Clarke  was  an  accomplice, 
and  had  been  well  paid  for  his  services.  This  last  accusation 
was  for  a  time  absolutely  disbelieved.  Clarke  was  the 
senior  officer  of  the  detective  force  at  Scotland  Yard,  and 
when  Superintendent  Williamson  was  away  he  took  charge 
of  the  office.  He  had  been  in  the  police  force  thirty- seven 
years,  and  since  1869  had  been  much  engaged  in  suppressing 
offences  against  the  betting  laws,  and  had  shown  great 
energy,  industry,  and  skill,  in  procuring  the  conviction  of 
many  persons  for  such  offences.  But  the  statements  were 
so  definite,  and  in  some  important  respects  were  so  strongly 
confirmed,  that  eventually  Clarke  was  included  in  the  charge 
of  conspiracy  to  defeat  the  ends  of  justice.  After  many 
hearings  at  Bow  Street,  Clarke,  Druscovich,  Meiklejohn, 
and  another  well-trusted  inspector  named  Palmer,  together 
with  Edward  Froggatt,  a  London  solicitor,  were  committed 
for  trial. 

My  speech  in  the  Penge  case  was  then  attracting  a  good 
deal  of  attention.  Clarke  came  to  me  with  an  introduction 
from  Mr.  George  Lewis,  assured  me  that  he  was  innocent, 
and  begged  me  to  defend  him,  and  in  consideration  of  his 
slender  means  to  accept  a  small  fee  and  very  small  refreshers. 
I  believed  him  and  sympathised  with  him,  and  agreed  to  a 
refresher  of  five  guineas  a  day,  half  the  amount  which  had 
been  paid  me  in  the  Staunton  case. 

The  trial,  which  began  at  the  Old  Bailey  on  October  24th, 
1877,  was  the  longest  which  has  ever  taken  place  in  that 
Court.  There  were  several  Jews  on  the  jury,  and  at  their 
request  the  Judge  agreed  not  to  sit  on  Saturdays.  Twenty 
full  days  were  occupied  by  the  trial ;  eighty-seven  witnesses 
were  examined  for  the  prosecution  ;  one  day  was  filled  by 
the  Attorney-General's  opening,  and  nearly  two  days  by 
his  reply. 

Sir   John   Holker's   opening   completely   explained   the 


1877]  HARRY   BENSON  139 

strange  delay  which  had  taken  place  in  bringing  to  justice 
the  contrivers  of  the  Great  Turf  Fraud.  The  concocters  and 
chief  actors  in  that  fraud  were  two  young  men  named 
Harry  Benson  and  William  Kurr.  Benson  was  an  English- 
man, born  in  Paris,  where  his  father  was  in  business.  ID 
1871  he  had  attempted  a  fraud  on  the  French  Relief  Com- 
mittee at  the  Mansion  House  by  representing  himself  as  a 
French  Marquis  from  a  town  in  France  which  had  been 
burnt  by  the  Germans,  and  whose  inhabitants  were  in  the 
greatest  distress.  For  this  he  had  been  sentenced  to  twelve 
months'  imprisonment.  He  spent  this  period  in  the  prison 
infirmary,  for  while  awaiting  trial  he  had  tried  to  commit 
suicide  by  setting  on  fire  the  bed  on  which  he  was  lying,  and 
although  his  life  was  saved  his  legs  were  so  severely  burnt 
that  he  was  ever  afterwards  a  hopeless  cripple.  In  1874 
he  was  in  lodgings  at  Dalston  when  he  became  acquainted 
with  William  Kurr,  and  thenceforward  he  was  the  contriver 
and  Kurr  was  the  chief  actor  in  the  schemes  of  fraud.  With 
money  obtained  by  one  successful  adventure  Benson  went 
in  January  1875  to  the  Isle  of  Wight,  and  there  in  the  name 
of  Yonge,  which  he  had  adopted  on  leaving  prison,  he  took 
a  pleasant  house  at  Shanklin  called  Rosebank.  An  elderly 
widow,  Mrs.  Avis,  with  whom  he  had  lodged  at  Dalston, 
came  there  to  be  his  housekeeper.  He  had,  besides  two 
female  servants,  a  coachman,  a  footman,  and  a  French  valet, 
he  kept  two  carriages ;  and  he  let  it  be  understood  that 
he  was  really  a  French  nobleman,  even  of  princely  rank, 
and  on  terms  of  friendship  with  the  Empress  of  Austria. 
Vivacious,  intelligent,  and  well  educated,  an  accomplished 
musician,  himself  a  composer,  he  was  soon  accepted  as  a 
pleasant  associate  by  some  of  the  good  society  of  the  Isle 
of  WTight,  and  the  occasional  accidental  dropping  of  a  hand- 
kerchief with  an  embroidered  coronet  and  the  letter  "  M," 
which  was  supposed  to  stand  for  Murat,  gave  a  touch  of 
interesting  mystery  to  the  acquaintance. 

The  purchase  of  a  controlling  interest  in  a  local  news- 
paper was  useful  in  establishing  his  position.  William 
Kurr  when  he  made  Benson's  acquaintance  was  only  twenty- 


I4o  THE  DETECTIVE   CASE  [CHAP,  xiv 

three  years  of  age.  As  a  boy  of  fourteen  he  had  been  a 
clerk  in  the  office  of  the  South  Eastern  Railway,  but  a  year 
in  that  employment  tired  him  of  respectability,  and  he 
became  a  betting  tout  and  clerk  to  fraudulent  bookmakers 
and  money  lenders,  and  according  to  his  own  account  given 
at  this  trial  he  lived  from  the  year  1871  onwards  by  plunder- 
ing and  swindling  the  public.  He  kept,  and  carefully 
docketed,  and  placed  in  safe  places  of  deposit,  all  the  letters 
and  telegrams  which  he  at  any  time  received  from  his 
accomplices  in  the  police  force,  and  which,  useful  as  they 
had  been  in  maintaining  his  hold  upon  them,  were  now  used 
to  obtain  his  own  release  from  the  penal  servitude  to  which 
he  had  been  sentenced.  Their  production,  and  the  inde- 
pendent confirmatory  evidence  which  was  now  forthcoming, 
made  any  effective  defence  of  Druscovich,  Meiklejohn, 
Palmer,  and  Froggatt  quite  impossible.  Bank-notes  which 
were  unquestionably  the  proceeds  of  the  fraud  were  traced 
to  the  possession  of  Druscovich  and  Meiklejohn ;  an  im- 
portant letter  and  telegram  which  warned  Benson  of  pursuit 
were  in  the  handwriting  of  Palmer  ;  a  forged  telegram  which 
nearly  produced  the  release  of  the  fugitives  when  they  had 
been  arrested  at  Rotterdam  was  in  the  handwriting  of 
Froggatt,  and  although  my  colleagues  did  valiantly  all  that 
could  be  done  for  their  clients,  the  only  chance  of  escaping 
the  conviction  of  either  of  these  four  prisoners  lay  in  the 
possibility  that  one  or  two  members  of  the  jury,  who  of 
course  went  to  their  homes  every  night,  might  be  corrupted 
and  induced  to  refuse  to  agree  to  a  verdict  of  guilty.  The 
authorities  were  somewhat  uneasy  about  this,  and  upon  some 
jurymen  who  lived  in  the  East  of  London  a  careful  watch 
was  kept. 

In  Clarke's  case  there  was  room  for  doubt,  and  my  task 
in  defending  him  was  very  interesting,  but  not  very  easy. 
He  had  been  three  times  to  see  Benson  at  Shanklin  in  1875  ; 
once  with  the  knowledge  of  Superintendent  Williamson  and 
upon  an  innocent  errand.  The  two  later  visits  were  paid 
without  the  knowledge  of  his  superiors,  and  were  not  re- 
ported at  the  office.  Benson  said  that  on  the  second  visit 


1877]  THE   BRIBES  141 

he  had  paid  Clarke  £50  in  gold.  Kurr  said  that  on  Sep- 
tember 25th,  1876,  when  information  of  the  fraud  came  to 
Scotland  Yard,  Clarke  saw  him  and  asked  if  the  French 
notes  had  been  changed. 

This  precaution  had  been  taken,  and  it  was  not  until 
three  days  later  that  the  English  bank-notes  for  which  they 
had  been  exchanged  were  stopped  at  the  bank,  and  warrants 
issued  for  the  arrest  of  the  criminals. 

Even  then  the  warrants  were  taken  out,  not  in  their 
real  and  well-known  names,  but  in  the  fictitious  names 
which  they  had  assumed  for  the  purposes  of  the  fraud. 
Kurr  said  that  a  week  later  he  gave  Clarke  £150  in  gold, 
and  gave  Meiklejohn  a  cigar  box  with  £200  in  gold  in  it  to 
give  to  Druscovich. 

Meiklejohn  was  paid  £500  three  weeks  afterwards,  and  so 
safe  did  the  conspirators  think  themselves  that  he  took  it 
in  five  £100  notes  of  the  Clydesdale  Bank,  which  Benson,  by 
a  very  bold  trick,  had  obtained  in  exchange  for  the  English 
notes  which  had  been  stopped. 

If  the  evidence  of  Benson  and  Kurr  were  accepted  the 
proof  of  guilt  was,  of  course,  complete  ;  and  the  great 
strength  of  that  evidence,  as  Sir  John  Holker  pointed  out, 
lay  in  the  fact  that  their  statements  to  the  Treasury  Solicitor, 
afterwards  repeated  in  the  witness  box,  were  given  separ- 
ately, without  any  opportunity  of  communication,  or  of 
either  of  them  learning  what  the  other  had  said,  were  in 
complete  agreement,  and  that  m  the  long  and  detailed 
narrative,  full  of  details  and  of  dates,  scarcely  any  incon- 
sistencies could  be  detected. 

Again  it  seemed  scarcely  possible  that  during  three 
months,  while  Meiklejohn  and  Druscovich  and  Palmer 
were  doing  their  parts  in  a  conspiracy  to  prevent  the  arrest 
of  Benson  and  Kurr,  the  chief  inspector  at  Scotland  Yard, 
who  had  himself  twice  been  to  the  Isle  of  Wight  to  see 
Benson,  and  knew  that  he  was  in  some  way  associated 
with  betting  frauds,  should  have  failed  to  suspect  that  his 
immediate  subordinates  were  responsible  for  the  strange 
delays  which  were  hindering  the  course  of  justice. 


142  THE   DETECTIVE    CASE  [CHAP,  xiv 

The  evidence  of  the  convicted  criminals  again  had  some 
important  corrobo ration. 

A  man  who  had  been  in  Benson's  service  as  valet  from 
June  to  Christmas  in  1875  said  that  besides  seeing  Inspector 
Clarke  upon  his  two  visits  to  Shanklin  he  saw  him  visit 
Benson  at  the  Westminster  Palace  Hotel  and  the  Langham 
Hotel ;  and  that  on  another  occasion  he  went  with  Benson 
to  Clarke's  house,  and  that  Clarke  came  out  and  was  talking 
to  Benson  for  twenty  minutes.  This  confirmed  statements 
made  by  Kurr  and  Benson. 

A  cabdriver  was  called  and  said  that  in  the  autumn  of 
1876  he  drove  Kurr  from  his  house  in  Marquess  Road, 
Canonbury,  to  the  corner  of  Great  College  Street,  West- 
minster (where  Clarke  lived),  set  him  down  there,  and  waited 
for  him  about  half  an  hour ;  and  that  about  a  fortnight 
later  he  again  drove  him  to  the  same  place,  waited  for  him 
half  an  hour  or  three-quarters  of  an  hour,  and  then  drove 
him  back  to  the  Marquess  Road.  This  was  the  visit  at 
which  Kurr  stated  that  he  gave  Clarke  £150  in  gold. 

But  the  most  difficult  evidence  to  deal  with  was  that 
which  related  to  Clarke's  correspondence  with  Benson, 

Mr.  H.  R.  Clarke,  the  principal  of  the  Shanklin  College, 
Isle  of  Wight,  gave  a  curious  little  bit  of  evidence.  He  was 
the  owner  of  Rosebank,  which  he  had  let  to  Benson.  In 
August  1876  at  Benson's  request  he  went  to  the  house  and 
took  possession  of  all  the  letters  he  found  there.  From 
these  he,  according  to  Benson's  instructions,  selected  the 
letters  and  telegrams  sent  by  Clarke,  and  put  them  in  a 
packet,  and  sent  them  by  post  to  324,  Essex  Road,  Islington. 
But  he  made  a  mistake  in  the  name,  and  addressed  them  to 
"  Watson  "  instead  of  "  Hawkins."  They  were  returned 
to  the  Dead  Letter  Office,  and  remained  there  until  after 
Benson  had  been  convicted,  and  had  given  information  to 
the  Treasury  Solicitor.  All  the  other  letters  at  Rosebank 
were  destroyed. 

These  letters  now  produced  were  dated  April  igth  and 
26th  and  June  i6th  and  i8th,  1875.  No  official  note 
had  been  made  of  their  dispatch.  There  was  nothing 


1877]  MRS.    AVIS  143 

actually  compromising  in  their  contents,  but  they  referred 
to  letters  which  had  been  received  from  Benson  and  which 
Clarke  had  not  reported  or  preserved. 

The  evidence  of  the  next  witness  appeared  to  make  the 
case  complete. 

Mrs.  Avis  was  a  respectable  woman  about  sixty  years  of 
age,  with  whom  Benson  had  lodged  in  1873  and  1874  and 
who  was  housekeeper  at  Rosebank  in  1875.  Benson  in 
his  evidence  had  said,  "  I  got  Mrs.  Avis  to  copy  my  letters 
to  Clarke,  or  some  of  them,  because  I  did  not  wish  that  any 
of  my  handwriting  should  fall  into  his  hands.  Some  of  the 
letters  she  copied  were  written  between  April  I3th  and 
July  5th,  1875.  I  was  last  at  Shanklin  on  June  27th,  1876." 

Mrs.  Avis  now  said  that  of  the  last  four  letters  she  thus 
copied  she  kept  the  drafts,  and  that  she  posted  some  of  the 
copies  herself  to  the  address  which  Benson  gave  her,  "  George 
Clarke,  Esq.,  20,  Great  College  Street,  Westminster."  When 
she  left  Rosebank  these  four  drafts  were  the  only  ones  she 
took  with  her,  and  they  remained  in  her  hands  until  she 
gave  them  to  the  Treasury  Solicitor  in  May  1877,  after 
Benson  and  his  accomplices  had  been  convicted. 

The  drafts  now  produced  were  all  in  Benson's  hand- 
writing, and  the  dates  of  two  of  them,  June  I5th  and  I7th, 
corresponded  with  Clarke's  letters  of  June  i6th  and  i8th 
which  had  been  rescued  from  the  Dead  Letter  Office. 

The  importance  of  this  evidence  could  not  be  denied. 
In  each  letter  Benson  referred  to  his  "  debt  "  to  Clarke  and 
his  desire  to  pay  it,  speaking  of  it  on  one  occasion  as  a  debt 
due  to  Mrs.  Clarke. 

The  first  letter  asked  Clarke  to  come  to  Shanklin,  and  the 
postscript  said,  "  If  you  do  not  like  to  write,  merely  let  me 
know  what  time  I  may  expect  you,  as  it  is  urgent  I  should 
see  you  before  Saturday."  An  undated  draft  contained  a 
still  more  compromising  sentence.  "It  is  quite  possible 
that  in  a  day  or  two  I  shall  have  to  come  to  London,  and 
I  hope  you  will  appoint  a  place  where  to  see  you,  unknown 
to  any  one.  I  shall  then  have  pleasure  in  acquitting  myself 
of  the  balance  due  to  you.  Please  return  this  letter  to  me." 


144  THE   DETECTIVE   CASE  [CHAP,  xiv 

There  was  another  portion  of  the  evidence  which  bore 
heavily  against  my  client.  In  the  correspondence  between 
the  confederates,  especially  between  Kurr  and  Meiklejohn, 
Inspector  Clarke  was  frequently  mentioned  as  "  C,"  "the 
Chieftain,"  "  the  Old  Man/'  and  "  the  Old  Man  of  the  Duke 
of  York's  Column."  No  statement  in  that  correspondence 
directly  implicated  Clarke,  nor  would  it  have  been  evidence 
against  him  if  it  had,  but  it  was  clear  that,  rightly  or  wrongly, 
the  conspirators  believed  that  they  had  nothing  to  fear 
from  the  Chief  Inspector  of  the  Detective  Police. 

It  will  be  realised  that  my  task  in  defending  my  client 
was  a  very  difficult  one.  It  would,  indeed,  in  my  opinion, 
have  been  practically  impossible  to  obtain  an  acquittal 
if  at  that  time  the  law  had  permitted  accused  persons  to 
be  called  as  witnesses.  The  strange  rule  which  then  pre- 
vailed by  which  neither  a  prisoner  nor  his  wife  was  a  com- 
petent witness,  a  rule  which  was  the  worst  example  of  judge- 
made  law  which  I  have  ever  known,  often  operated  cruelly 
against  an  innocent  person,  but  in  nine  cases  out  of  ten  it 
was  of  advantage  to  the  guilty.  The  change  in  the  law 
which  has  very  properly  been  made  has  seriously  reduced 
the  opportunities  of  the  advocate.  A  brilliant  speech 
before  the  prisoner  is  called  is  dangerous  ;  when  the  prisoner 
has  been  called  it  is  often  impossible. 

My  cross-examination  in  the  Detective  case  was  careful 
but  by  no  means  long.  It  is  a  very  useful  general  rule  that 
you  should  not  cross-examine  when  you  cannot  contradict. 
By  provoking  a  repetition  of  the  story  you  fix  it  on  the 
minds  of  the  jury,  and  you  run  the  risk  of  the  mention  of 
some  fresh  detail  which  may  be  a  strong,  perhaps  a  con- 
clusive, evidence  of  its  truth. 

So  I  cross-examined  William  Kurr  and  Mrs.  Avis  very 
briefly,  although  even  then  one  incautious  question  to  Mrs. 
Avis  did  me  some  mischief. 

Harry  Benson  required  special  treatment.  My  chief 
object  was  to  show  him  at  his  best ;  as  the  polished  and 
educated  man  who  was  capable  of  deceiving  and  outwitting 
even  a  trained  inspector  of  police.  He  looked  little  like 


1877]  GROSS-EXAMINATION  145 

that  when  my  turn  came  to  cross-examine  him.  He  was 
ill ;  it  was  the  afternoon  of  his  third  day  in  the  witness- 
box  ;  and  all  that  morning  he  had  been  cross-examined  with 
just  severity,  but  with  some  roughness,  by  Montagu  Williams. 

As  he  sat  in  the  chair  put  for  him  in  the  witness-box, 
in  the  ugly  convict's  clothes,  hair  cropped,  face  worn  with 
illness  and  fatigue,  he  was  a  pitiful  object.  My  first  words 
brought  a  change.  "  Now,  Mr.  Benson,  I  have  a  few 
questions  to  ask  you."  It  was  the  first  time  for  months 
that  he  had  been  spoken  to  in  any  tone  of  courtesy.  His 
face  lit  up,  he  rose  to  his  feet,  bowed  in  acknowledgment, 
and  stood  with  an  air  of  deference,  waiting  to  reply.  Then 
I  asked  him  about  his  education,  his  musical  accomplish- 
ments, his  friends  in  society  at  the  Isle  of  Wight,  and  the 
appointments  of  his  pleasant  home  at  Shanklin  ;  and  before 
the  friendly  conversation  had  lasted  ten  minutes,  I  felt  that 
my  object  had  been  attained. 

The  refinement  and  even  distinction  of  manner,  which 
had  imposed  upon  Sir  Thomas  Dakin  and  Mr.  Alfred  Roth- 
schild, again  became  perceptible,  and  while  it  did  not  influence 
the  jury  to  believe  his  evidence,  it  made  them  think  it 
possible  that  even  Inspector  Clarke  might  have  been  deceived. 

There  was  another  witness  who  needed  very  careful  cross- 
examination.  Superintendent  Williamson  was  called  to  pro- 
duce reports  which  had  from  time  to  time  been  made  by  the 
accused  officers,  and  to  prove  the  handwriting  of  some  of 
the  documents.  He  also  produced  an  envelope  addressed 
to  Giffard,  Bridge  of  Allan,  in  Kurr's  handwriting,  which 
had  been  posted  in  London  on  November  loth,  and  con- 
tained a  piece  of  blotting-paper  with  the  printed  char- 
acters which  it  was  alleged  Clarke  had  sent. 

Now  Mr.  Williamson  had  been  associated  with  Inspector 
Clarke  in  the  detective  work  at  Scotland  Yard  for  many 
years  ;  had  found  him  a  most  valuable  assistant ;  had 
treated  him  with  entire  confidence  ;  and,  until  the  occurrence 
of  the  strange  difficulties  and  delays  in  the  arrest  of  Benson 
and  Kurr,  had  never  seen  cause  to  doubt  his  fidelity.  I  was 
informed  that  he  still  had  some  friendly  feeling  towards  his 


146  THE   DETECTIVE   CASE  [CHAP,  xiv 

old  colleague,  and  that  he  would  not  be  sorry  if  his  evidence 
were  to  assist  me  in  my  defence.  But  he  was  a  man  of 
the  strictest  honour,  and  every  question  would  certainly 
be  truly  answered,  whatever  the  effect  of  the  answer  might 
be.  My  task  therefore  was  so  to  frame  my  questions  that 
each  should  bring  a  reply  in  my  client's  favour,  without 
provoking  any  qualifying  phrase  which  would  indicate  the 
opinion  of  the  witness  on  the  case  actually  before  the  jury. 
On  that  task  I  spent  many  hours.  I  prepared  questions 
and  answers  as  if  I  were  studying  a  chess  problem,  seeing 
how  far  it  would  be  possible  to  follow  up  and  emphasise 
with  safety  the  favourable  answers  which  I  knew  some  of 
my  questions  must  receive.  My  labour  was  well  rewarded, 
and  Superintendent  Williamson's  evidence  did  much  to 
help  me  to  success. 

The  first  week  of  the  trial — the  opening  speech  of  Sir 
John  Holker  and  the  evidence  of  Kurr  and  Benson — was 
very  interesting.  The  second  and  third  weeks,  with  the 
long  procession  of  witnesses  to  prove  the  details  of  the  story, 
were  very  dull,  and  then  came  the  final  speeches. 

My  speech  for  Clarke  was  the  most  elaborately  prepared 
of  all  my  forensic  speeches.  I  had  three  weeks  for  its  pre- 
paration, and  plenty  of  time  for  drafting  it  while  unimport- 
ant witnesses  were  being  examined. 

I  have  no  room  for  quotation,  and  the  speech  if  read  at  all 
should  be  read  as  a  whole.  Then  the  purpose  of  its  arrange- 
ment will  be  seen.  My  scheme  was  to  throw  all  my  strength 
into  an  exordium  which  might  make  the  jury  feel  that  such 
an  accusation  made  against  a  man  of  stainless  reputation 
and  long-continued  public  service  was  really  incredible. 
Then,  when  I  came  to  deal,  discreetly  and  not  in  too  great 
detail,  with  the  serious  evidence  against  him,  each  of  the 
twelve  minds  which  it  was  my  duty  to  influence  would  be  pre- 
disposed, and  even  eager,  to  reject  or  explain  away,  or  wholly 
to  ignore,  facts  which  were  inconsistent  with  the  conclusion 
at  which  it  had  already,  if  unconsciously,  arrived.  The 
peroration  was  intended  to  sweep  away  any  lingering  doubts 
by  the  confidence  of  its  rhetorical  appeal  for  an  acquittal. 


1877]  MY    CLIENT   ACQUITTED  147 

By  far  the  larger  part  of  the  Attorney-General's  reply  was 
devoted  to  the  case  against  Clarke.  While  he  was  speaking 
Sir  Hardinge  Giffard  came  in  and  sat  beside  me.  Presently 
he  said  to  me,  "  He  is  putting  in  some  pretty  heavy  shot." 
'  Yes,"  said  I,  "he  is,  but  I  think  I  have  made  a  Plevna  of 
my  own."  Europe  was  then  ringing  with  the  story  of  the 
magnificent  defence  which  has  been  a  warning  to  the  world 
ever  since  of  the  formidable  fighting  power  of  the  Turk. 

My  illustration  was  accurate.  After  the  trial  I  was  told 
by  one  of  the  jury,  either  Mr.  Wertheimer,  the  foreman,  or 
Mr.  Godfrey  Pearse,  that  at  the  end  of  my  speech  the  jury 
practically  agreed  that  Clarke  must  be  acquitted,  and  did 
not  pay  very  great  attention  to  Sir  John  Holker's  subse- 
quent examination  of  the  evidence.  There  was  a  model 
summing  up  by  the  Judge,  clear,  complete,  but  not  over- 
elaborate,  and  quite  impartial,  and  then,  after  fifty  minutes' 
consideration,  which,  I  believe,  was  entirely  concerned  with 
the  question  which,  if  any,  of  the  prisoners  should  be  re- 
commended to  mercy,  they  gave  their  verdict  of  "  Guilty  " 
against  Meiklejohn,  Druscovich,  Palmer,  and  Froggatt,  and, 
amid  cheering  in  the  Court  and  in  the  street,  found  Clarke 
"  Not  Guilty." 

Druscovich  and  Palmer  were  recommended  to  mercy; 
but  Baron  Pollock  said  that  the  highest  sentence  he  had 
power  to  pass  was  quite  inadequate  as  punishment  for  so 
grave  an  offence,  and  sentenced  them  all  to  two  years' 
imprisonment  with  hard  labour. 

Inspector  Clarke  was  at  once  retired  from  the  detective 
service  upon  a  substantial  pension. 

The  convicts  who  had  given  evidence  were  soon  after- 
wards released,  and  I  know  nothing  of  their  subsequent 
history,  except  that  Benson  was  some  years  later  convicted 
of  fraud  in  New  York,  and  imprisoned  in  the  Sing  Sing  gaol. 
One  day  he  flung  himself  over  the  balustrade  of  the  well 
staircase  of  the  prison,  and  was  killed  by  the  fall. 

Palmer  was  more  sinned  against  than  sinning.  He  knew 
nothing  of  Kurr  or  Benson,  and  had  received  no  bribe  from 
any  one.  He  had  been  persuaded  by  some  one  more  astute 


148  THE   DETECTIVE   CASE  [CHAP,  xiv 

than  himself  to  write  the  telegram  and  letter  whose  pro- 
duction convicted  him,  and  in  loyalty  to  his  fellow  prisoners 
he  kept  silence.  After  his  term  of  imprisonment  had  ex- 
pired he  was  allowed  by  the  Surrey  magistrates,  partly  at 
my  instance,  to  become  the  holder  of  a  public-house  licence, 
and  I  believe  did  well. 


CHAPTER   XV 
SOUTHWARK:  1877-1880 

THE  two  cases  which  I  have  just  described  were  valuable 
to  me  in  many  ways.  The  actual  fees  which  I  received  were 
not  large ;  in  the  Penge  case,  which  lasted  for  seven  days,  I 
had  forty  guineas  on  my  brief  and  ten  guineas  a  day  re- 
fresher ;  in  the  detective  case,  which  lasted  twenty  days, 
my  total  fees  were  under  two  hundred  guineas.  But  the 
opportunity  came  to  me  at  the  stage  of  my  professional 
career  when  it  was  most  valuable,  and  when  I  was  at  the 
age  when  my  powers,  such  as  they  were,  had  reached  their 
full  strength ;  and  I  was  able  to  make  two  speeches  which 
I  place  among  the  six  forensic  speeches  by  which  I  hope 
to  be  remembered. 

The  immediate  effects  were  very  pleasant.  A  chorus  of 
eulogy  in  the  press  made  my  name  very  widely  known ; 
my  income  rose  at  once  from  £3,000  to  £5,000,  and  con- 
tinued to  progress  from  that  higher  level.  I  had  come  to 
the  front  rank  in  my  profession,  and  now  I  determined  to 
go  forward  with  all  my  energy  in  the  work  of  politics.  My 
candidature  for  South wark  was  decided  upon  at  a  meeting 
of  the  Conservative  Association  in  July  1878,  and  it  was 
formally  inaugurated  in  1879,  in  view  of  the  approaching 
dissolution,  by  a  banquet  at  the  Bridge  House  Hotel  on 
February  I3th,  a  date  which  has  been  curiously  important 
in  my  political  history  ;  and  from  that  time  forward  I  was 
continuously  at  work  in  the  borough  of  Southwark. 

I  lectured  on  various  subjects  at  parochial  schoolrooms, 
joined  Conservative  clubs  and  spoke  at  their  smoking 


150  SOUTHWARR  [ctiA*.  XV 

concerts ;  subscribed  to  athletic  clubs  and  presided  at  their 
dinners ;  and  was  always  seen  and  very  often  heard  at 
public  functions  in  the  borough.  The  fact  that  I  attended 
the  Surrey  Sessions  at  Newington,  then  within  the  parlia- 
mentary borough  of  Southwark,  and  had  a  large  practice 
at  the  Licensing  Sessions,  amounting  indeed  to  about  £600 
a  year>  was  of  course  a  great  advantage  to  me,  and  made  me 
thoroughly  familiar  with  the  neighbourhood,  and  person- 
ally known  to  a  class  of  men  who  at  that  time,  when  election 
committee  rooms  were  almost  invariably  found  at  public- 
houses,  had  an  even  larger  influence  at  elections  than  they 
at  present  possess. 

But  with  all  these  advantages  and  with  all  my  activity 
I  was  not  satisfied  with  the  progress  made.  In  those  days 
the  circulation  of  newspapers  in  a  working-class  constitu- 
ency was  very  small.  We  had  no  local  Conservative  paper. 
Outside  the  private  rooms  of  a  handful  of  large  traders  and 
wharfingers  The  Times  was  never  seen,  and  the  cheaper  daily 
papers  rarely  mentioned  the  political  affairs  of  a  South 
London  district.  If  they  had,  very  few  of  the  electors 
would  have  seen  them.  I  determined  to  try  to  lessen  at 
all  events  this  disadvantage  by  having  a  weekly  paper  of 
our  own. 

There  existed  an  old-established  paper  called  The  Kentish 
Mercury,  which  was  published  by  Messrs.  Merritt  and 
Hatcher  at  Deptford,  and  was  edited  by  a  very  able  jour- 
nalist and  staunch  old  Tory,  one  James  Watson. 

I  went  to  the  proprietors  and  suggested  that  they  should 
publish  a  separate  edition  of  The  Kentish  Mercury  to  be 
called  The  Southwark  Mercury,  which  should  contain  in  its 
two  central  pages  nothing  but  Southwark  news,  and  should 
have  half  a  column  of  advertisement  space  which  should 
be  at  our  disposal  for  any  political  announcements  we  wished 
to  make,  and  I  asked  on  what  terms  they  would  issue  such 
a  paper.  They  said  they  would  do  this  upon  a  subscription 
to  be  paid  in  advance  at  a  penny  per  copy  for  two  years. 
It  was  originally  suggested  that  2,000  copies  should  be 
delivered  in  parcels  of  500  each  at  four  Conservative 


"THE  SOUTHWARK  MERCURY"  151 

clubs  in  different  parts  of  the  borough,  but  we  found  we 
should  then  be  in  much  difficulty  in  distributing  the  paper, 
and  eventually  it  was  agreed  that  we  should  pay  the  sub- 
scription for  the  2,000  copies,  but  that  instead  of  that 
number  being  delivered  at  the  clubs,  1,200  copies  should  be 
sent  by  post  to  addresses  which  we  would  supply.  We 
had  some  difficulty  in  getting  subscribers,  and  of  the  £866 
required  I  think  I  had  to  find  £500  myself,  but  the  money 
was  well  spent. 

There  were  in  the  borough  some  eight  hundred  public- 
houses,  beer  houses,  and  coffee  houses,  and  to  each  of 
these  a  copy  of  the  paper  was  sent  free  of  charge  every 
week. 

The  first  number  appeared  on  January  4th,  1879,  and  I 
have  no  doubt  whatever  that  it  was  in  great  measure  owing 
to  this  paper  that  I  had  the  triumphant  success  which  came 
to  me  a  year  later.  I  was  in  constant  communication  with 
the  editor  as  to  what  should  appear  in  the  columns  of 
Southwark  news,  and  the  speeches  I  made  and  the  lectures 
I  delivered  were  well  reported,  and  so  I  was  enabled  to  make 
a  general  appeal  to  the  constituency  which  would  not  have 
been  possible  in  any  other  way. 

And  every  now  and  then  a  good  strong  well-written  lead- 
ing article  pointed  out  to  the  voters  how  great  was  their 
good  fortune  in  having  the  opportunity  of  sending  me  to 
the  House  of  Commons. 

All  things  went  well  with  me.  In  strong  health,  with  a 
loving  wife  and  three  dear  children,  an  income  rapidly 
growing  far  beyond  my  needs,  and  the  prospect  of 
political  success  brightening  before  me,  I  was  indeed  a 
happy  man. 

People  often  speak  lightly  of  such  and  such  a  day  as 
being  the  happiest  day  of  their  lives.  One  of  the  very 
happiest  of  mine  was  June  I4th,  1879.  It  was  a  beautiful 
summer  Saturday,  and  before  I  left  home  in  the  morning  I 
arranged  a  little  excursion  with  my  wife  and  children  for 
the  afternoon. 

At  chambers  I  found  a  letter  from  the  Attorney-General. 


I52  SOUTHWARK  [CHAP,  xv 

DEAR  CLARKE, 

Would  you  like  to  hold  the  office  of  Attorney-General's 
Devil  ?     If  yes  I  will  confer  it  upon  you.     Please  let  me 
have  an  answer  at  your  earliest  convenience. 
I  remain, 

Yours  sincerely, 

JOHN  HOLKER. 

It  was  a  very  tempting  offer.  Bowen,  who  had  just  been 
made  a  judge,  after  seven  years'  tenure  of  this  office,  was 
said  to  have  earned  an  income  of  £11,000  a  year,  and  al- 
though mine  already  reached  £5,500,  the  difference  was 
not  unimportant.  Besides,  the  work  of  the  Junior  Counsel 
to  the  Treasury  was  regular  and  certain,  and  by  almost 
unbroken  rule  it  led  in  due  time  to  a  judgeship.  But  I 
went  to  Sir  John  Holker's  room  resolved  to  refuse  it,  and  I 
told  him  so.  He  was  very  kind  ;  he  pointed  out  the  value 
of  the  position,  reminded  me  of  the  reversionary  judgeship, 
and  warned  me  not  to  make  a  hurried  decision  which  I 
might  afterwards  regret. 

I  was  firm,  and  said  I  was  earning  more  than  I  needed  for 
my  ordinary  wants,  that  I  had  every  hope  that  my  income 
would  go  on  increasing,  and  that  my  ambition  to  sit  in  the 
House  of  Commons  looked  likely  to  be  fulfilled  at  the  next 
election.  He  listened  ;  suggested  reasons  for  not  refusing, 
and  at  last  said,  "  Well,  have  you  made  up  your  mind  ?  " 

"  Yes,"  said  I ;  "I  thank  you  very  much  for  the  offer, 
and  shall  always  be  very  proud  of  it,  but  I  finally  refuse/' 

"  Then,"  said  he,  shaking  my  hand,  "  I  tell  you  you 
are  quite  right.  You  will  enjoy  Parliament,  and  I  believe 
you  will  have  a  great  career." 

Then  he  asked  me  to  whom  he  should  give  the  post.  I 
told  him  I  thought  that  question  was  a  greater  compliment 
to  me  than  the  offer  had  been,  and  said  there  were  two 
men  at  the  Bar  either  of  whom  would  make  an  excellent 
appointment.  They  were  J.  C.  Mathew  and  A.  L.  Smith. 
Mathew,  I  said,  was  in  all  the  big  commercial  cases,  and 
would  certainly  get  a  judgeship  soon,  and  he  was  not  a 
man  of  strong  physique. 


1877-80]  JOY  AND  SORROW  153 

But  A.  L.  Smith  was  a  strong  man,  a  splendid  worker, 
the  very  ideal  of  a  Treasury  Counsel.  "  Then,"  said  the 
Attorney-General,  "  I  will  give  it  to  him." 

When  I  left  the  room  my  excellent  clerk,  John  Peacock, 
who  had  then  been  with  me  eleven  years  and  who  had 
guessed  the  reason  of  the  interview,  was  anxiously  waiting 
to  hear  the  result,  and  looked  very  sad  when  I  told  him  I 
had  refused.  "  Why — whatever  do  you  want,  sir  ?  "  said 
he.  "  Well,  John,"  I  said,  "  I  should  like  to  have  ten 
years  in  the  House  of  Commons  and  be  Solicitor-General." 

I  went  to  Waterloo  to  meet  my  dear  ones,  and  we  travelled 
to  Richmond,  where  the  Inns  of  Court  Rifles,  of  which  I 
had  been  for  some  years  a  member,  were  in  camp  and  having 
a  reception  and  some  sports. 

After  a  pleasant  hour  there  we  walked  on  through  the 
park  to  Twickenham  Ferry.  My  dear  wife  was  full  of  joy 
and  pride,  my  girl  of  ten  and  my  boy  of  seven  danced  along 
beside  us.  We  were  all  in  perfect  health,  all  as  happy  as 
human  souls  can  be ;  no  earthly  blessedness  was  denied  us. 

I  have  never  since  that  day  felt  the  glow  of  perfect 
happiness  without  trembling  to  think  of  what  the  future 
might  have  in  store. 

Within  a  week  my  dear  mother's  health  had  broken  down, 
and  she  had  passed  into  the  condition  of  a  hopeless  invalid, 
to  linger  on  for  three  years  of  mental  and  physical  decay. 
Within  a  month  a  sudden  and  previously  unknown  or  un- 
noticed cough  had  alarmed  me  about  my  wife,  and  I  had 
received  from  Sir  Andrew  Clark,  to  whom  at  once  I  took 
her,  a  letter  telling  me  that  her  lungs  were  so  seriously 
affected  that  she  could  not  live  for  more  than  two  years. 
In  less  than  four  months  my  darling  little  Mabel,  who  on 
that  June  day  had  looked  a  very  picture  of  childish  life 
and  beauty,  died  of  tubercular  meningitis. 

I  had  taken  my  wife  to  Devonshire  that  autumn  in  the  hope 

that  the  softer  air  would  relieve  the  cruel  cough  which  was 

now  wearing  down  her  strength,  and  had  then  left  her  with 

friends  at  Petersfield  while  I  came  back  to  work. 

One  evening  my  little  girl  leaned  her  head  upon  my 


I54  SOUTHWARK  [CHAP,  xv 

shoulder  and  complained  of  headache.    The  next  day  it 
continued  and  her  eyes  had  a  strange  look. 

I  fetched  her  mother  to  town  and  called  in  a  noted  expert 
in  children's  ailments.  He  took  me  to  the  door  when  he 
left,  and  told  me  to  break  it  to  my  wife  that  the  case  was 
hopeless,  and  that  our  child  could  not  live  for  many  days. 
A  week  later  I  held  her  hand,  and  repeated  Greenwood's 
exquisite  poem,  but  I  do  not  think  she  heard  me. 

"  It  is  only  a  falling  asleep  'twixt  the  evening  and  morning  light." 
"  Good- night  then,  papa,  and  God  bless  you."     "  My  darling,  my  darling, 
good-night." 

So  in  three  years  from  that  day  when  I  seemed  to  touch 
the  very  height  of  earthly  happiness,  child,  wife,  and  mother 
were  all  to  be  lost. 

The  year  1880  opened  sadly.  The  loss  of  our  dear  little 
daughter  had  fallen  very  heavily  on  my  wife  and  myself, 
and  there  was  the  ever-present  trouble  of  her  own  gradually 
failing  health.  The  winter  in  London  tried  her  too  much, 
so  I  took  rooms  for  her  at  Hastings,  and  went  down  myself 
from  Saturday  to  Monday.  My  legal  work  was  very  trying, 
for  the  earning  of  between  £5,000  and  £6,000  a  year  in  junior 
practice  means  very  long  hours  of  work  and  a  great  deal  of 
monotonous  if  not  difficult  labour ;  and  the  coming  elec- 
tion, which  could  not  be  long  delayed,  kept  me  constantly 
busy  with  meetings  and  dinners  at  Southwark,  and  in  the 
work  which  had  to  be  done  for  The  Southwark  Mercury. 

I  felt  very  weary  and  depressed,  and  even  thought  of 
asking  to  be  released  from  my  candidature,  v/hen  suddenly 
the  opportunity  came  to  which  I  had  so  long  been  looking 
forward. 

The  story  of  the  Southwark  election  may  be  partly  told 
in  the  letters  which  I  found  rather  more  than  a  year  later 
in  the  desk  where  my  dear  wife  had  treasured  them. 

ST.  STEPHEN'S  CLUB, 

January  zoth,  1880. 

MY  DARLING, 

I  have  been  dining  here  this  evening  and  working 
away  since  dinner  at  my  speech  for  next  Monday,  and  now 


1877-80]  A   HUSBAND'S   LETTERS  155 

before  I  go  home  I  will  have  a  little  chat  with  my  Pet.  I 
have  really  something  to  tell  you.  Do  not  be  disappointed  ; 
it  is  not  that  the  "  Silk  "  has  come  ;  I  have  heard  nothing 
about  that.  But  I  hear  that  this  afternoon  Mr.  Locke  was 
taken  home  from  the  Temple  very  ill.  He  is  an  old  man, 
and  quite  possibly  a  few  days  may  see  a  vacancy  for  South- 
wark.  In  one  way  it  would  be  a  serious  matter  for  me. 
To  have  to  fight  Southwark  twice  in  a  few  months  would 
be  a  very  costly  thing.  However,  I  must  fight  if  the  chance 
comes  and  trust  to  success  to  make  it  up  to  me.  I  hope  you 
have  had  two  days  as  bright  and  pleasant  as  they  have 
been  here,  and  that  the  improvement  it  made  me  so  happy 
to  see  on  Sunday  is  continuing  and  advancing.  I  am  better  ; 
not  quite  the  thing,  but  quite  ready  to  begin  a  good  fight 
over  the  water.  My  love  to  Fanny  and  fondest  affection  to 
little  Jurat  Jum  and  to  my  own  dearest  Pet. 

Ever  your  own 

E.  C. 


ST.  STEPHEN'S  CLUB, 

January  ^oth,  1880. 

DEAREST, 

Just  a  line — the  fight  has  come  and  I  am  up  to  my 
eyes  in  work.  But  I  shall  run  down  to-morrow  afternoon 
by  the  usual  train  to  have  a  few  hours  of  love  and  quiet 
with  you.  I  hope  you  are  better  again  ;  keep  your  spirits 
up  and  let  us  look  forward  to  a  holiday  together  at  Easter. 
By  that  time  I  may  be  M.P. ;  if  not,  I  shall  have  fought  a 
contest  that  will  not  be  forgotten.  I  am  well,  but  for  a 
cold  caught  on  Monday  when  a  window  was  opened  over 
my  head  while  I  was  speaking.  However,  I  will  take  all 
care  of  myself.  My  address  will  not  be  published  or  any 
meeting  held  until  after  the  funeral,  probably  Tuesday, 
and  the  election  itself  will  very  likely  take  place  on  Thurs- 
day week.  I  have  the  best  agent  in  England,  I.  N.  Edwards, 
Smith's  agent  at  Westminster.  He  will  meet  me  here  at 
7  this  evening,  and  afterwards  I  speak  at  a  meeting  at 
Lambeth.  I  enclose  letter  from  Shirley  House,  and  shall 
hope  to  see  the  boy  to-morrow  and  bring  you  news  of  him. 

Ever  your  own 

EPWARD, 

MRS.  EDWARD  CLARKE, 
54,  Eversfield  Place, 
St.  Leonards. 


156  SOUTHWARK  [CHAP,  xv 

I  was  justified  in  saying  that  the  contest  would  not 
soon  be  forgotten.  It  was  being  fought  at  a  time  and 
place  which  gave  it  great  importance.  Southwark  was  a 
constituency  of  250,000  inhabitants  and  22,000  voters. 
The  vacancy  was  caused  by  the  death  of  a  Liberal  member, 
representing  what  wa£  taken  to  be  a  Liberal  constituency. 
One  seat  indeed  had  been  filled  by  Colonel  Beresford,  a 
local  wharfinger,  and  a  sound  Tory,  but  on  both  occasions 
of  his  election  he  had  polled  less  than  half  of  the  votes 
recorded,  and  had  owed  his  success  to  the  divisions  on  the 
Liberal  side.  Now  the  new  machinery  of  the  Birmingham 
Caucus  was  put  in  force.  The  Liberal  Two  Hundred  selected 
Mr.  Andrew  Dunn,  an  iron-merchant  and  prominent  Non- 
conformist, who  had  long  been  active  in  Radical  political 
work  in  the  borough,  and  had  been  a  defeated  candidate 
at  the  previous  election. 

Mr.  George  Shipton,  a  Radical  Labour  candidate,  insisted 
on  standing,  but  it  was  known  that  he  had  very  slight 
chance  of  success.  The  question  seemed  to  be  whether 
he  would  take  away  enough  votes  from  the  Liberal  candi- 
date to  let  me  in. 

It  was  fortunate  for  me  that  before  Mr.  Locke's  death  a 
meeting  had  been  arranged  for  the  evening  of  January  26th, 
and  although,  as  the  funeral  had  not  taken  place,  no  refer- 
ence was  made  to  the  election,  I  had  the  opportunity  of 
making  a  speech  on  important  public  topics,  and  through 
The  Southwark  Mercury  and  in  a  reprint  in  pamphlet  form 
it  was  circulated  all  over  the  constituency. 

The  three  great  questions  before  the  electors  were  Foreign 
Policy,  Home  Rule,  and  Local  Option,  and  on  all  three  I 
spoke  very  distinctly. 

My  address  was  issued  on  February  4th.  It  was  a  long 
document;  not,  I  fear,  very  useful  for  election  purposes, 
and,  as  I  soon  found,  very  expensive  to  print,  but  it  was 
my  first  formal  declaration  of  political  principles,  and  I 
wanted  it  to  be  full  and  emphatic.  Its  length  has  made  me 
somewhat  reluctant  to  reproduce  it  here,  but  it  is  the  only 
full  statement  of  opinion  and  policy  which  I  ever  had 


1877-80]  AN  ELECTION  ADDRESS  157 

occasion  to  publish,  and  I  hope  that  all  who  take  an 
interest  in  the  story  of  my  political  life  will  read  this  address 
as  a  preface. 

One  topic  which  was  not  specially  dealt  with  in  the' 
address  soon  came  to  the  front.  That  was  the  question  of 
Tariff  Reform.  At  a  large  meeting  at  Bermondsey  I  de- 
clared myself  strongly  opposed  to  any  taxes  on  food  or 
raw  material,  but  in  favour  of  taxes  on  imported  manu- 
factured goods  where  foreign  nations  had  placed  import 
duties  upon  ours. 

ADDRESS  TO  THE  ELECTORS  OF  THE  BOROUGH  OF  SOUTH- 
WARK,  FEBRUARY  4TH,  1880 

GENTLEMEN, 

The  death  of  the  senior  member  for  your  Borough, 
my  old  friend  Mr.  John  Locke,  who  had  for  many  years 
been  held  in  deserved  esteem  by  all  classes  among  his  con- 
stituents, affords  you  an  opportunity  of  expressing  your 
opinion  upon  the  conduct  of  public  affairs. 

The  questions  before  you  for  consideration  are  of  national 
importance  ;  and  the  judgment  which  shall  be  expressed 
by  the  great  constituency  of  Southwark  will  materially 
influence  the  opinion  and  the  action  of  the  country  at  large. 

During  the  last  six  years  a  Conservative  Government 
has  directed  the  policy,  and  conducted  the  administration, 
of  Great  Britain,  under  the  accumulated  difficulties  of  foreign 
war,  depressed  commerce,  failing  harvests,  and  the  most 
malicious  opposition  which  the  history  of  this  country 
affords.  As  a  Conservative,  I  ask  you  fairly  to  consider 
the  title  which  that  Government  has  established  to  your 
confidence  and  support. 

In  Eastern  Europe  the  policy  of  Her  Majesty's  Govern- 
ment has  received  the  justification  of  complete  success. 
The  Berlin  Treaty  has  not  only  for  the  past  eighteen  months 
secured  the  peace  of  Europe,  but  has  dissolved  the  for- 
midable triple  alliance,  which  hindered  the  progress  of 
Constitutional  freedom  and  menaced  the  independence  of 
the  smaller  States.  At  the  great  council  which  gathered 
at  Berlin,  the  representatives  of  Great  Britain  spoke  in  the 
name  of  a  people  who  were  anxious  for  honourable  peace, 
but  had  shown  themselves  ready  to  bear  the  burdens  and 


158  SOUTHWARK  [CHAP,  xv 

anxieties  of  war.  The  firm  and  resolute  will  of  Lord  Beacons- 
field  was  shared  and  sustained  by  the  great  majority  of  his 
countrymen,  and  the  jealousies  and  ambitions  which  had 
threatened  Europe  with  the  horrors  of  wide-spreading  war 
disappeared  before  the  peaceful  and  unselfish  but  un- 
wavering policy  of  the  people  of  Great  Britain. 

In  Afghanistan  the  Liberal  Government  of  1868-74  had 
succeeded  in  disturbing  and  alienating  the  Ameer,  and  in 
providing  for  Russia  an  opportunity  for  unofficial  war 
against  this  country,  of  which,  in  the  crisis  of  the  European 
difficulties,  she  gladly  availed  herself.  To  have  remained 
quiescent  would  have  been  to  expose  our  Indian  Empire  to 
the  danger  of  an  invasion,  of  whose  time  and  place  we  should 
have  had  no  warning,  of  whose  strength  we  could  make  no 
estimate,  and  whose  retreat  we  could  not  follow.  The 
emergency  was  firmly  met,  the  passes  of  the  North- Western 
frontier  are  now  in  our  hands  ;  and  the  chief  danger  which 
threatened  the  safety  of  our  empire  in  India  is  finally  dis- 
pelled. 

In  South  Africa  a  war,  for  which  the  Home  Government 
was  in  no  way  responsible,  has  ended  in  the  destruction  of 
a  barbaric  military  organisation  which  disturbed  the  peace 
and  hindered  the  progress  of  our  colonies. 

The  Government  has  been  called  upon  to  provide  for 
large  and  exceptional  expenditure,  while  the  depression  of 
commerce  and  the  failure  of  recent  harvests  have  checked, 
for  a  time,  the  natural  tendency  of  the  revenue  to  increase. 
Yet  they  have  neither  imposed  heavier  burdens  on  the 
people,  nor  increased  the  national  debt.  The  Liberal 
Government  of  1868-74  had  five  complete  years  of  office  ; 
of  the  Conservative  administration  only  five  years  have 
yet  been  completed.  It  is  fair  to  compare  these  terms. 
In  the  five  years  of  Conservative  rule  the  amount  paid  in 
taxation  was  less  per  head  than  it  was  in  the  five  years  of 
Mr.  Gladstone  ;  the  Income  Tax,  which  in  the  same  period 
amounted  under  Mr.  Gladstone  to  is.  lod.  in  the  £,  in  the 
five  years  of  the  Conservatives  was  only  is.  3^.  ;  and,  at 
the  end  of  the  five  years,  the  Conservative  Government  had 
effected  a  real  reduction  in  the  debt  of  the  country  of  no 
less  than  seventeen  millions  and  a  half. 

It  has  been  the  fashion  of  late  for  Radical  speakers  to 
declare  that  domestic  legislation  has  been  neglected.  The 
accusation  comes  from  those  who,  by  abetting  a  system 


1877-80]  THE  TORY   RECORD  159 

of  mere  obstruction,  have  done  their  best  to  bring  Parlia- 
mentary Government  to  inefficiency  and  disrepute.  And  the 
accusation  is  not  true.  During  the  last  six  sessions  between 
twenty  and  thirty  Acts  have  been  passed  into  law  by  the 
exertions  of  the  Ministry,  which  have  directly  and  sub- 
stantially contributed  to  the  health,  education,  and  social 
welfare  of  the  people. 

The  administration  of  the  law  has  been  rendered  more 
simple  and  more  speedy  ;  the  prosecution  of  criminals  has 
been  assumed  as  the  duty  of  the  State  instead  of  being  left 
to  the  revenge  of  the  victim  of  the  crime  ;  the  right  to  a 
trial  by  jury  has  been  widely  extended  ;  the  unnecessary 
and  costly  imprisonment  for  small  offences  has  been  greatly 
lessened  ;  the  treatment  of  criminals  undergoing  imprison- 
ment has  been  rendered  uniform. 

The  laws  relating  to  Public  Health  have  been  consolidated 
and  improved ;  municipalities  have  received  powers  to 
remove  unhealthy  dwellings.  Rivers  have  been  protected 
from  pollution  and  Commons  from  enclosure ;  and  the 
Factories  Act  of  1874,  and  the  Factories  and  Workshops 
Act  of  1878,  completed  a  series  of  Acts  which  have  given 
comfort  to  the  homes  of  working  men  and  saved  their 
children  from  the  evils  of  premature  toil. 

The  relations  between  employers  and  employed  have 
been  improved  by  the  Acts  of  1875,  and  the  real  grievance 
which  working  men  suffered  under  the  law  of  conspiracy,  as 
then  expounded,  was  removed  in  that  year ;  in  the  same 
session  the  statute  was  passed  under  which  Friendly  Societies 
have  been  enabled  to  reorganise  themselves  on  a  safer 
basis  than  before ;  and  the  Agricultural  Holdings  Act  secured 
to  every  tenant,  who  had  no  written  contract  with  his  land- 
lord, compensation  for  what  he  had  put  upon  the  farm,  and 
an  ample  term  of  notice  before  he  could  be  made  to  quit 
possession. 

I  have  not  attempted  to  summarise  the  whole  of  the 
legislation  of  these  years,  but  the  measures  I  have  named 
do,  in  themselves,  constitute  a  body  of  social  reform  of 
which  the  Ministry  may  be  proud. 

Of  a  ministry  which  has  thus  worthily  upheld  the  influ- 
ence of  Great  Britain,  wisely  administered  the  national 
resources,  and  diligently  applied  itself  to  useful  legislation, 
I  avow  myself  a  firm  and  earnest  supporter,  and  I  appeal 
to  ail  among  you  who  value  our  good  name  abroad  and 


160  SOUTHWARK  [CHAP,  xv 

good  government  at  home  to  give  me  your  votes  in  this 
contest. 

The  condition  of  Ireland  has  again  become  a  question  of 
serious  difficulty.  Bad  harvests  have  checked  the  steady 
advance  in  material  prosperity  which  she  has  now  enjoyed 
for  many  years,  and  to  add  to  her  misfortune  an  agitation 
has  been  raging  among  her  people  which  must  inevitably 
tend  to  drive  away  the  capital  which  she  so  sorely  needs. 
The  first  duty  of  the  nation  is  clear ;  to  relieve  by  volun- 
tary subscription,  or,  if  needful,  by  the  application  of  public 
funds,  the  real  want  which  is  undoubtedly  felt  in  certain 
parts  of  Ireland.  The  second  duty  is  equally  clear ;  to 
uphold  the  authority  of  the  law  and  to  protect  with 
impartial  firmness  order,  property,  and  freedom.  I  hope 
that  any  inequalities  before  the  law  which  may  exist 
may  speedily  be  redressed ;  that  municipal  institutions 
in  Ireland  may  be  extended  ;  that  the  measures  recently 
passed  to  aid  the  intermediate  and  higher  education  of 
Irishmen  may  receive  full  development ;  and  that  the 
purely  administrative  business  of  the  country  may  be 
carried  out  by  local  inquiries  and  provisional  orders, 
instead  of  the  costly  and  tedious  process  of  Committees 
and  Bills  in  the  Imperial  Parliament.  But  I  distrust 
the  legislation  of  panic  or  of  passion,  and  the  states- 
manship which  allows  a  political  murder  or  street  outrage 
to  prompt  the  overthrow  of  a  church  and  the  con- 
fiscation of  its  property ;  or  which  offers  to  the  starving 
peasants  of  Connaught  the  barren  gift  of  a  scheme  by  which 
the  Imperial  Government  may  become  an  improvident 
money-lender,  to  enable  thriving  tenants  to  purchase  the 
fee-simple  of  the  lands  they  farm.  And  I  would  defend  the 
integrity  of  the  Empire  as  resolutely  against  a  domestic 
faction  as  against  a  foreign  foe. 

In  the  field  of  practical  legislation  there  is  plenty  of  work 
for  Parliament  to  do.  The  codification  of  the  Criminal 
Law ;  the  establishment  of  a  reasonable  and  uniform  system 
of  valuation  for  rating  purposes ;  the  amendment  of  the 
law  of  bankruptcy ;  the  simplification  of  the  title  to  land  ; 
the  removal  of  the  rule  which  prevents  a  person  charged 
with  crime  from  giving  evidence  on  his  own  behalf,  and  will 
not  permit  his  wife  to  be  called  as  a  witness  ;  the  abolition 
of  the  rule  by  which  the  eldest  son  in  the  case  of  an  intestacy 
takes  the  whole  of  the  landed  property, — these  are  among 


1877-80]     THE  CHURCH,  AND  LOCAL  OPTION          161 

the  matters  upon  which  I  hope  I  might  usefully  assist  in 
the  work  of  legislation. 

I  am  by  education  and  by  conviction  a  Churchman,  and 
I  believe  that  the  maintenance  of  the  Church  of  England 
and  her  continued  devotion  to  the  work  of  religious  educa 
tion  are  the  surest  guarantees  of  the  happiness  and  true 
prosperity  of  the  country.  The  schemes  of  the  Liberation 
Society,  now  for  party  purposes  discreetly  suppressed,  to  be 
again  brought  forward  if  the  confederacy  of  1868  is  again 
found  possible,  will  find  in  me  a  resolute  opponent. 

I  have  never  been  able  to  persuade  myself  that  voluntary 
abstinence  from  any  luxury  entitles  me  to  prohibit  other 
people  from  enjoying  it,  and  I  oppose  the  Permissive  Bill 
agitation  in  all  its  forms. 

I  have  lived  many  years  in  the  South  of  London,  and  am 
thoroughly  acquainted  with  the  local  interests  of  South- 
wark ;  and  during  the  last  eighteen  months  I  have  taken 
every  opportunity  of  making  myself  known  among  you.  In 
so  large  a  borough  a  personal  canvass  is,  of  course,  impos- 
sible, but  I  ask  you  to  read  my  speeches,  to  come,  if  you 
can,  to  hear  me,  and  then  to  judge  if  I  am  fit  to  be  your 
member.  I  have  no  ambition  which  is  in  conflict  with  your 
interests  ;  and  if  you  honour  me  with  the  proud  position  of 
your  representative  in  Parliament,  I  will  strive  with  all  my 
powers  to  prove  myself  worthy  of  your  trust. 
I  am,  Gentlemen, 

Your  most  obedient  Servant, 

EDWARD  CLARKE. 

HUNTINGDON  LODGE,  PECKHAM, 
February  qth,  1880. 

I  spent  a  very  busy  week  in  speaking  and  canvassing, 
and  at  its  close  was  able  to  write  confidently  of  my  prospects 
of  success. 

ST.  STEPHEN'S  CLUB, 
February  nth,  1880. 

DEAREST  WIFE, 

I  was  very  glad  to  hear  this  morning  that  you  are 
feeling  better,  and  are  able  to  get  out,  and  hope  you  will 
be  looking  quite  yourself  when  I  come  to  receive  your 
congratulations. 

For  I  think  I  am  going  to  win.  There  is  great  enthusiasm 
for  me  all  over  the  borough. 


162  SOUTHWARK  [CHAP,  xv 

I  spoke  at  five  meetings  yesterday,  have  been  to  two 
to-day,  and  have  three  more  this  evening. 

So  far  my  voice  holds  out  very  well,  but  I  am  glad  there 
is  only  one  more  day's  talking. 

The  votes  will  not  be  counted  until  Saturday,  but  I  hope 
that  by  two  o'clock  that  day  you  will  have  a  telegram  of  the 
result.  I  am  off  now  again,  so  with  fondest  love,  good-bye. 

Your  own 

EDWARD  CLARKE. 

The  day  of  polling  was  my  day  of  fortune  (February  I3th), 
and  was  one  of  brilliant  weather.  As  the  clock  struck  eight 
and  the  poll  opened,  my  carriage,  gay  with  purple  and 
orange  ribands,  and  with  two  of  Tilling's  oldest  servants 
on  the  box,  left  the  door  of  the  Bridge  House  Hotel,  my 
central  committee-room,  and  I  drove  to  Rotherhithe,  the 
most  Conservative  district  of  the  borough,  to  meet  the  men 
as  they  came  out  from  the  Docks  for  breakfast.  The  next 
twelve  hours  were  a  tumult  of  cheers,  and  handshakings, 
and  little  speeches  at  street  corners,  and  visits  to  the 
committee-rooms,  to  each  of  which  I  paid  three  visits  in  the 
day.  The  streets  were  gay  with  flags,  and  as  the  day  wore 
on  crowds  gathered  at  every  polling-place,  and  highly 
imaginative  placards  showing  Dunn  well  ahead  in  the  poll 
added  to  the  excitement.  At  eight  o'clock  the  poll  closed, 
and  I  drove  along  the  Borough  on  my  way  home,  standing 
in  the  carriage  and  waving  my  hat,  to  show  our  friends 
that  we  believed  we  had  won. 

HUNTINGDON  LODGE,  PECKHAM  ROAD, 

February  itfh,  1880. 

DEAREST, 

The  Poll  is  over,  and  although  we  cannot  tell  for 
certain,  I  think  I  have  won. 

You  shall  have  a  telegram  as  soon  as  possible,  and  I  hope 
to  be  down  by  the  usual  (3)  train. 

I  have  not  much  voice  left,  but  otherwise  am  quite  well. 

Your  own 

E.  C. 

The  next  morning  after  eight  or  nine  hours  of  sound  and 
untroubled  sleep  I  went  down  to  the  Vestry  Hall  in  the 


1877-80]  A  NOTABLE  VICTORY  163 

Borough  Road  for  the  counting  of  the  votes,  confident  and 
cheerful.  I  found  my  chairman,  Mr.  Mark  Cattley,  haggard 
and  anxious.  He  told  me  he  had  hardly  slept  all  night. 
Presently  the  ballot  boxes  were  opened,  and  the  papers  tied 
up  in  bundles  of  fifty  and  handed  over  as  required  to  the 
polling  clerks.  Each  clerk  had  beside  him  the  representa- 
tives of  the  three  candidates,  who  saw  each  paper  as  he 
dealt  with  it,  and  took  care  that  the  vote  was  entered  in 
the  right  column.  In  a  few  minutes  it  was  clear  that 
Ship  ton  was  quite  out  of  the  race.  There  were  seldom 
more  than  half  a  dozen  votes  for  him  in  one  of  the  packets. 
It  was  some  time  before  I  could  feel  quite  sure  that  I  had 
beaten  Dunn.  But,  although  the  packets  varied  in  their 
yield,  the  columns  which  recorded  the  votes  for  me  were 
filled  first  upon  every  sheet,  and  before  the  counting  was 
half  completed  the  question  that  really  interested  us  all 
was  whether  I  had  polled  more  than  both  the  other  candi- 
dates together.  To  my  great  delight  this  proved  to  be 
the  case.  About  one  o'clock  the  figures  were  announced  ; 
Clarke,  7,683,  Dunn,  6,830,  and  Shipton,  799. 

It  was  a  notable  victory.  It  was  not  only  the  gain  of  a 
seat.  For  the  first  time,  and  indeed  for  the  only  time  in 
its  electoral  history,  the  borough  of  Southwark  had  returned 
a  Conservative  member  by  a  majority  of  the  votes  cast  at 
the  election. 

During  the  morning,  although  the  rain  was  falling,  a  great 
crowd  had  been  gathering  in  front  of  the  Vestry  Hall,  and 
when  we  went  to  the  windows  for  the  public  declaration  of 
the  numbers  I  had  a  tremendous  reception.  Of  course 
there  were  shouts  for  a  speech,  but  that  was  impossible. 

I  had  hardly  any  voice  left,  so  I  could  only  point  to  my 
throat  and  express  my  thanks  by  gesture.  My  committee 
and  I  had  a  very  festive  lunch  at  the  Bridge  House  Hotel, 
and  in  the  afternoon  I  went  down  to  Hastings,  where  my 
dear  wife  had  received  the  first  telegram  sent  off  after  the 
result  was  known. 

It  was  a  triumphant  journey.  At  Tonbridge  I  had  quite 
a  levee  of  congratulation  ;  at  Hastings  the  Conservative. 


164  SOUTHWARK  [CHAP.  XV 

Association  rooms  were  befiagged,  and  at  night  illuminated 
in  honour  of  the  victory.  The  next  day,  Sunday,  was  my 
thirty-ninth  birthday,  and  I  never  needed  more  the  day  of 
rest  and  worship. 

Letters  of  congratulation  poured  in  upon  me ;  most 
delightful  of  all  the  few  lines  in  which  my  dear  father, 
within  two  months  of  his  eightieth  birthday,  spoke  his  joy 
and  pride. 

125,  SEVEN  SISTERS  ROAD, 
February  i^th,  1880. 

Is  it  possible  I  can  address  my  very  dear  son  Edward  as 
an  M.P.  It  is  so  certainly,  though  I  could  almost  fancy  it 
a  dream. 

May  God  bless,  guide,  and  comfort  you  in  all  your  doings 
is  the  earnest  prayer  of  your  ever  affectionate 

FATHER 

Best  love  to  dear  Annie  and  congratulations. 

HOUSE  OF  COMMONS, 

February  i6th,  1880. 

MY  DARLING  WIFE, 

My  first  letter  from  the  House  must  of  course  come 
to  your  dear  self.  I  have  had  a  great  reception  here  ; 
cheering  as  I  came  up  the  floor  to  take  the  oath  and  sign 
the  Roll  of  Parliament,  and  the  Ministers  present  shook 
hands  with  me,  Sir  Stafford  Northcote,  the  Leader  of  the 
House,  being  the  first  to  offer  his  hand.  Since  then  I  have 
been  making  the  round  of  the  library,  dining-rooms,  etc.,  and 
being  introduced  to  members  I  did  not  know.  I  am  over- 
whelmed with  congratulations.  And  best  of  all  I  have  just 
seen  Corry,  Lord  Beaconsfield's  private  secretary,  who  tells 
me  the  Chief  has  been  specially  pleased  with  my  Southwark 
speeches,  and  particularly  with  the  phrase  quoted  in  to-day's 
Times.1  He  wants  to  make  my  acquaintance,  and  wishes  me 
to  go  to  lunch  with  him  one  day  this  week.  Grandpapa, 
Edward  Pinches,  and  Percival  had  seats  just  above  the 
clock,  where  they  could  see  very  well. 

The  boy  has  gone  home,  and  as  no  division  is  expected  at 

1  "  Englishmen  are  proud  of  the  privileges  of  freedom  and  are  not 
afraid  of  the  responsibilities  of  Empire." 


1877-80]  LUNCH  WITH  THE  CHIEF  165 

present  I  am  going  over  to  the  St.  Stephen's  to  dine  with 
Grandpapa  and  E.  P. 

Good-night,  my  darling,  and  God  bless  you. 

Your  devoted  husband 
EDWARD  CLARKE 

One  more  letter  will  complete  the  story  of  this  contest. 

ST.  STEPHEN'S  CLUB, 

February  iglh,  1880. 

MY  DARLING, 

I  was  delighted  to  get  your  letter  this  morning  and 
to  find  that  you  are  in  somewhat  better  spirits 

For  the  letter  yesterday  made  me  very  sad.  It  is  a  heavy 
drawback  to  the  pleasure  of  all  my  great  successes  that  I 
cannot  have  with  me,  to  share  the  triumph,  the  dear  one 
who  loved  me  and  believed  in  me  in  the  day  of  humble 
beginnings. 

But  do  not  be  too  downhearted,  dear.  The  winter  is 
fast  going  by,  and  the  milder  spring  will  let  you  be  out 
more,  and  perhaps  may  bring  you  back  all  the  health  and 
strength  you  had  a  year  and  a  half  ago. 

Meanwhile  I  know  you  will  like  to  hear  of  what  I  do 
This  afternoon  I  lunched  with  "  the  Chief."  His  private 
secretary,  Sir  William  Dyke,  and  Whitley,  the  new  member 
for  Liverpool,  were  there.  Lord  B.  was  most  kind.  He 
said  the  South wark  fight  was  "  a  brilliant  campaign  bril- 
liantly fought,"  and  chatted  about  politics  and  literature 
for  an  hour  and  a  half.  But  I  cannot  tell  you  more  ;  I 
must  dress  and  be  off  to  dine  at  the  Grocers'  Hall,  and 
expect  a  late  night  at  the  House  afterwards.  Love  to 
Fanny.  I  shall  be  down  on  Saturday  by  the  usual  train, 
and  should  like  dinner  at  six. 

Ever  fondly  yours, 

EDWARD  CLARKE. 

My  voice  is  coming  back  slowly. 

The  question  when  I  should  make  my  first  speech  was 
an  important  one.  Much  interest  had  been  taken  in  my 
election,  and  the  newspapers  had  said  much  in  praise  of  the 
speeches  I  had  made  during  the  contest. 

I  felt  bound  to  be  very  careful  in  choosing  the  oppor- 
tunity of  justifying,  if  I  could,  this  praise,  and  the  anticipa- 
12 


166  SOUTHWARK  [CHAP,  xv 

tion  of  my  friends.  Some  wise  counsellor,  I  think  Sir 
William  Hart  Dyke,  advised  me  to  study  the  order  paper 
and  see  what  subjects  were  fixed  for  the  Tuesday  and  Friday 
evenings,  choose  one  that  suited  me,  and  then  carefully 
prepare  my  speech.  I  chose  the  subject  of  Local  Option, 
which  was  to  be  discussed  on  Friday,  March  8th,  on  a  reso- 
lution to  be  proposed  by  Sir  Wilfrid  Lawson,  who  had 
given  up  the  Local  Veto  Bill  which  he  had  introduced  in 
several  successive  years,  and  now  sought  to  pledge  the 
House  to  a  general  declaration  in  favour  of  his  scheme.  I 
carefully  prepared  a  simple  debating  speech,  with  no  passages 
of  rhetorical  ornament,  not  even  a  peroration,  and  let  it 
be  known  that  I  meant  to  take  part  in  the  debate.  Sir 
John  Hay  had  acquired  a  prescriptive  right  to  occupy  the 
seat  next  above  the  gangway  in  the  second  row  on  the 
Government  side  of  the  House,  and  he  offered  it  to  me  for 
the  evening  as  the  best  position  from  which  a  private 
member  could  speak.  When  I  was  seen  in  his  place  at  the 
opening  of  the  debate,  Lord  George  Hamilton  sent  me  a 
note  saying  he  hoped  I  would  not  speak  until  after  ten 
o'clock,  a?  the  Speaker  would  call  me  whenever  I  rose,  and 
he  and  Stanhope  wished  me  to  speak  when  the  House 
would  be  full. 

So  I  sat  and  had  the  experience  which  I  suppose  has  been 
that  of  most  men  to  whom  success  in  the  House  of  Commons 
has  been  so  important,  and  who  understood  how  kind  and 
yet  how  critical  that  House  is.  As  the  debate  went  on  I 
heard  other  men  make  points  that  I  had  prepared ;  my 
head  began  to  ache  ;  I  could  eat  no  dinner,  but  rested 
for  an  hour  on  a  couch  in  the  upper  lobby  behind  the 
gallery,  and  felt  more  depressed  and  nervous  than  I  have 
ever  felt  before  or  since.  Lord  Barrington  at  that  time 
wrote  the  account  of  the  debates  for  the  Queen.  He  came 
and  sat  awhile  in  the  seat  below  me,  and  I  heard  him  say 
to  his  neighbour,  "He  is  not  going  to  speak ;  he  has  no 
notes/'  He  little  knew  how  thoroughly  I  had  in  memory 
the  notes  which,  for  safety's  sake,  I  carried  in  my  pocket. 
The  dull  hours  from  eight  to  ten  dragged  along  and  then 


1877-80]  MY   MAIDEN  SPEECH  167 

John  Bright  rose.  Rowland  Winn,  the  Whip,  came  to  me 
doubtingly.  "  Are  you  prepared  to  follow  Bright  ?  "  It 
was  the  very  chance  I  wanted  ;  and  while  cheers  were 
following  his  peroration,  which  was  admirable  in  expres- 
sion, but  to  my  surprise  obviously  read  from  his  manuscript, 
I  rose.  The  House  gave  me  a  generous  welcome,  but  my 
speech  was  nearly  ruined  at  its  start,  for  when  I  asked 
the  indulgence  of  the  House  for  my  presumption  in  following 
one  of  the  great  ornaments  of  its  debates,  a  dull  Tory 
sitting  next  to  me,  one  Denzil  Onslow,  protested  against 
the  complimentary  phrase  with  a  loud  "  Oh,  oh." 

For  a  moment  or  two  I  was  nearly  breaking  down,  I  could 
hardly  see  the  House ;  my  voice  sounded  strange  and 
harsh,  my  lips  were  dry.  But  my  trouble  was  noticed  ;  a 
kindly  and  general  cheer  set  me  right,  and,  when  once 
myself  was  forgotten  and  my  theme  alone  remembered,  I 
felt  no  difficulty. 

I  spoke  for  about  forty  minutes,  and  when  I  sat  down  I 
knew  I  had  succeeded  to  the  full  measure  of  my  hopes. 
Lord  Hartington  followed  and  closed  the  debate  and  spoke 
generously  of  me  and  of  my  speech. 

Then  came  the  division  and  the  congratulations  of  the 
Lobby,  and  the  thanks  of  ministers,  and  pleasantest  of  all 
a  letter  from  the  chief  of  the  Reporters'  Gallery  full  of  com- 
pliment and  good  wishes  from  my  old  friends  of  the  Press, 
and  I  was  a  proud  and  happy  man.  The  supreme  trial  of 
my  life,  its  hope  and  anxiety  from  boyhood,  had  come 
and  passed,  and  I  had  succeeded.  I  drove  home  and  found 
that  a  near  relative  who  had  heard  my  speech  from  the 
Strangers'  Gallery  had  arrived  half  an  hour  before  with  the 
news  of  my  triumph. 

I  found  my  dear  little  wife  in  a  passion  of  tears.  The 
triumph  had  indeed  come  to  which  we  had  so  long  looked 
forward,  but  it  was  a  triumph  she  could  not  share. 

She  knew  that  she  was  dying  :  I  knew  that  it  was  only 
for  a  few  months  longer  that  I  could  enjoy  the  sweet  and 
patient  companionship  which  had  blessed  and  strengthened 
me  in  the  years  of  struggle.  It  was  upon  her  that  the 


168  SOUTHWARK  [CHAP,  xv 

heaviest  burden  of  that  struggle  had  fallen,  for  she  had 
known  the  hard  economies  of  narrow  means,  and,  when  they 
had  passed,  the  pains  and  sorrows  of  illness,  and  I  do  not 
doubt  that  in  my  absorption  in  work  and  in  ambition  I  had 
often  been  negligent  and  unsympathetic.  Now  Fame  and 
Fortune  were  at  the  door,  and  she  could  not  stay  to  receive 
them.  I  knelt  beside  her  bed  and  we  cried  together. 

It  soon  appeared  as  if  my  triumph  would  be  very  short- 
lived. On  the  Saturday  the  newspapers  were  full  of  praise. 
The  Times  spoke  of  "  the  effective  part  which  Mr.  Clarke 
took  in  the  debate  in  his  vigorous  maiden  speech."  It  was 
with  a  new  pride  that  I  went  down  to  the  House  on  Monday 
to  taste  again  the  pleasures  of  success.  But  as  soon  as 
questions  were  over,  Sir  Stafford  Northcote  rose  to  make 
a  statement  as  to  the  course  of  business,  and  quietly  an- 
nounced that  as  soon  as  indispensable  matters  could  be 
disposed  of  Parliament  would  be  dissolved. 

Again  my  wonderful  good  fortune  had  shown  it  sell. 

For  the  House  to  have  risen  without  my  having  spoken 
would  have  been  a  real  disaster  to  me.  And,  knowing 
nothing  of  what  was  to  happen,  for  the  dissolution  was  only 
resolved  upon  at  a  Cabinet  meeting  on  the  Sunday,  at 
which  I  believe  Lord  Beaconsfield  was  overborne  by  his 
colleagues,  I  had  made  my  maiden  speech  at  the  last  hour 
of  the  last  day  on  which  the  House  would  listen  to  speeches 
at  all.  There  was  a  rush  from  London  and  every  one  was 
preparing  for  the  new  elections. 

It  was  a  heavy  blow  to  me.  The  labour  and  excitement 
of  such  a  contest  as  I  had  just  gone  through,  and  the 
anxiety  of  having  to  repeat  the  struggle,  coupled  with  my 
home  sorrows,  were  too  much  for  me.  In  the  afternoon 
my  friend  Edward  Pinches  went  with  me  to  the  office  of 
The  Kentish  Mercury  at  Deptford  to  arrange  for  the  printing 
of  my  address  and  the  publication  of  The  Southwark  Mercury 
during  the  election.  As  we  walked  along  the  Old  Kent 
Road  on  our  way  back  to  Huntingdon  Lodge,  I  suddenly 
felt  strangely  ill. 

My  eyes  were  dim,  my  feet  were  heavy.     Presently  I 


1877-80]  A   BREAK-DOWN  169 

said,  "  Teddy,  there  is  something  very  wrong  with  me,  I 
cannot  walk  straight."  He  took  me  into  a  shop,  and 
I  waited  while  a  cab  was  found  to  take  me  home.  There 
I  lay  on  a  couch  and  managed  to  dictate  my  address.  The 
next  morning  I  went  to  my  old  friend  Sir  William  Jenner. 
He  said,  "  Drive  home  at  once,  take  the  earliest  train  you 
can  to  Brighton,  take  a  quiet  lodging,  on  no  account  look 
at  a  book  or  a  newspaper,  walk  about  on  the  sea-front  till 
you  are  tired  out,  and  then  go  in  and  sleep,  and  drink  every 
day  two  glasses  of  the  best  champagne  you  can  get "  (I 
had  been  for  four  years  a  strict  teetotaller).  My  wife  could 
not  go  with  me,  so  my  sister  Fanny  did.  I  followed  the  rules 
given,  and  at  the  end  of  a  fortnight  I  was  able  to  go  with 
Edward  Pinches  to  stay  in  the  Isle  of  Wight. 

Meanwhile,  on  March  24th,  Parliament  had  been  dis- 
solved and  the  elections  were  going  on,  but  I  knew  nothing 
about  them  except  that  my  committee,  who  had  definitely 
agreed  with  me  directly  the  approach  of  the  dissolution 
was  announced  that  I  should  be  the  only  Conservative  can- 
didate, changed  their  minds,  perhaps  in  view  of  my  illness, 
and  brought  out  Mr.  Mark  Cattley  as  my  colleague.  He 
was  a  jovial,  good-tempered  man,  but  knew  nothing  of 
politics  and  was  a  wretchedly  poor  speaker.  His  single  joke, 
and  he  was  quite  fond  of  it,  was,  "  My  friends,  you  know 
I  am  a  man  of  mark."  When  four  days  before  the  polling 
I  came  back  and  reported  myself  to  Sir  William  Jenner 
and  got  permission  to  appear  on  the  platform,  I  found  that 
all  was  lost.  An  unscrupulous  Irishman  had  been  down 
making  lying  speeches  about  me.  Although  I  had  never 
been  in  the  House  when  the  question  of  flogging  in  the  army 
was  discussed,  coloured  placards  were  posted  about  the 
borough,  showing  a  soldier  being  flogged  and  the  blood 
running  down  his  back,  while  I  looked  on  approvingly. 

The  result  was  determined  by  the  Irish  Roman  Catholic 
vote.  The  priests  were  strongly  with  me  on  the  question 
of  religious  education,  but  as  one  of  them  told  me  they 
feared  to  lose  their  hold  on  the  people  altogether  if  they 
attempted  to  control  them,  and  four  or  five  hundred  Irish- 


i;o  SOUTHWARK  [CHAP,  xv 

men  who  voted  for  me  in  February,  in  April  marched  to 
the  poll  four  abreast  with  green  ribands  in  their  coats  to 
vote  against  me.  The  figures  at  the  poll  were :  Cohen, 
9,693  ;  Thorold  Rogers,  9,521  ;  Clarke,  8,163  ;  and  Cattley, 

7>674- 

So  for  a  time  my  political  career  appeared  to  close. 


CHAPTER   XVI 

ELECTION  PETITIONS  :   l88o 

THE  Southwark  elections  had  been  very  expensive;  the  adver- 
tised election  expenses  of  both  sides  in  the  two  contests  which 
had  occurred  within  six  weeks  were  over  £22,000.  There 
had  been  generous  subscriptions,  and  the  party  fund  helped 
largely,  so  I  had  personally  contributed  only  £1,500,  but 
this  was  not  an  insignificant  sum.  My  health,  too,  had  been 
badly  shaken.  Still,  I  had  made  my  way  into  the  House 
of  Commons,  and  had  there  made  one  successful  speech. 
And  while  the  March  election  was  going  on  Lord  Cairns  had 
given  me  the  silk  gown  for  which  I  had  asked  immediately 
after  my  election  in  February. 

Usually  a  new  Q.C.  finds  his  income  is  for  a  time  dimin- 
ished. This  was  not  the  case  with  me,  for  while  in  1879 
I  had  earned  £5,300,  in  1880  my  fee-book  showed  a  total 
of  £6,000.  My  expenditure  on  the  elections  was  soon  made 
up.  There  was  a  large  crop  of  election  petitions,  and  I  was 
retained  in  twelve. 

To  be  so  soon  deprived  of  the  seat  which  I  had  worked  so 
hard  to  get  was,  of  course,  a  great  disappointment,  but  the 
consolation  I  had  given  to  Hardinge  Giffard  in  1874  now 
became  applicable  to  myself. 

Southwark  would  have  been  a  difficult  and  uncertain  and 
very  expensive  constituency. 

There  are  always  vacancies  occurring  in  a  new  House  of 
Commons  during  its  first  few  months,  especially  when  a  new 
Ministry  has  to  be  formed,  and  still  more  when  the  election 
has  been  as  corrupt  as  that  of  1880.  There  were  sure  to  be 
petitions  in  which  I  might  earn  large  fees,  and  it  was  not 

171 


172  ELECTION  PETITIONS  [CHAP,  xvi 

unlikely  that  one  of  these  might  open  to  me  a  way  of  return 
to  the  House.  And  if  I  could  get  back  I  should  find  myself 
in  the  best  possible  position  for  making  my  way  into  the 
front  fighting  rank. 

The  young  man  who  gets  into  the  House  of  Commons 
when  his  side  is  in  office  with  a  good  majority  has  a  very 
poor  chance  of  distinguishing  himself.  In  important  de- 
bates the  best  times  in  the  sitting  are  given  to  the  men 
on  the  front  benches,  and  although,  as  in  my  case,  a  new 
member  is  allowed  precedence  when  he  rises  to  make  his 
maiden  speech,  the  privilege  is  not  of  much  use  to  him  when 
there  are  a  hundred  other  new  members  with  the  same 
claim  to  preference  and  all  seeking  an  early  opportunity 
of  gratifying  their  wives  and  their  constituents.  And  on 
ordinary  nights  there  are  few  listeners,  and  the  Government 
Whips  are  anxious  to  get  business  done,  and  are  by  no 
means  encouraging  to  young  speakers. 

The  fortunate  man  is  he  who  finds  himself  in  the  House 
of  Commons  when  his  party  has  just  been  defeated  and 
turned  out  of  oifice.  Then  is  the  golden  opportunity  which 
he  too  often  allows  to  let  slip.  His  Whips  appreciate 
eloquence  in  a  way  which  was  quite  impossible  to  them 
when  in  office.  The  effective  speech  which  stimulates  debate 
and  incidentally  prevents  the  progress  of  Government 
business  is  a  sure  passport  to  their  favour,  and  it  is  in  these 
early  days  of  a  new  Parliament  that  future  under- secretary- 
ships are  won.  I  knew  that  if  I  came  back  to  the  House 
my  party  would  welcome  me,  so  I  turned  away  quite  con- 
tentedly to  my  legal  work. 

Before  the  end  of  the  month  I  had  taken  part  in  a  case 
which  was  remarkable  for  the  number  of  leading  counsel 
who  appeared  in  it.  It  was  the  prosecution  of  the  directors 
of  the  West  of  England  Bank  for  conspiring  to  publish  false 
balance  sheets. 

Eighteen  counsel,  of  whom  eleven  were  Queen's  Counsel, 
were  briefed  in  the  case,  and  eleven  of  them  afterwards 
obtained  judicial  office. 
The  case  came  on  for  trial  at  the  Old  Bailey  on  April  27th, 


1880]  LEADERS  OF  THE  BAR  173 

but  there  was  so  much  difficulty  in  finding  room  for  the 
Counsel  that  it  was  transferred  the  next  day  to  the  Court 
of  Queen's  Bench  at  Guildhall,  and  there  Lord  Chief  Justice 
Cockburn  presided  over  a  trial  which  lasted  for  eight  days. 
On  the  second  day  he  asked  the  defendants  if  they  would 
give  their  word  of  honour  that  they  would  attend  the  trial 
from  day  to  day,  and  accepted  their  promise  instead  of 
requiring  any  recognisances. 

The  names  of  the  Counsel  are  worth  recording  : 

For  the  Prosecution  : 

Sir  John  Holker,  Attorney-General  (afterwards  Lord 
Justice) ;  Sir  Hardinge  Giffard,  Solicitor-General 
(afterwards  Lord  Chancellor) ;  Arthur  Collins,  Q.C. 
(afterwards  Chief  Justice  of  Bengal) ;  A.  L.  Smith 
(afterwards  Master  of  the  Rolls) ;  and  McKellar. 

For  the  Defence — (all  the  defendants  but  two  were 
separately  represented)  : 

Sir  Henry  James,  Q.C.  (afterwards  refused  the  Lord 
Chancellorship) ;  Herschell,  Q.C.  (afterwards  Lord 
Chancellor) ;  Charles  Russell,  Q.C.  (afterwards  Lord 
Chief  Justice) ;  Arthur  Charles,  Q.C. ;  John  Day,  Q.C. ; 
and  Thomas  Bucknill,  Q.C.  (afterwards  Judges  of  the 
High  Court) ;  Petheram  (afterwards  Chief  Justice  of 
Bombay) ;  Norris  (afterwards  Judge  in  India) ;  Edward 
Clarke,  Q.C. ;  Ralph  Littler,  Q.C. ;  S.  H.  Day  (after- 
wards Master  of  the  High  Court) ;  and  Arthur  Poole 
(afterwards  Recorder  of  Bristol). 

On  the  fourth  day  of  the  trial  the  new  Ministry  took  office, 
and  Sir  Alexander  Cockburn  addressed  Sir  Henry  James 
and  Mr.  Herschell  as  "  Mr.  Attorney'1  and  "  Mr.  Solicitor." 

There  was  some  friction  between  Sir  John  Holker  and  the 
Lord  Chief  Justice,  who  was  not  satisfied  with  the  conduct 
of  the  prosecution,  and  appeared  very  soon  to  form  an 
opinion  in  favour  of  the  defendants,  and  the  trial  concluded 
on  the  eighth  day  with  an  unhesitating  verdict  of  acquittal. 


I74  ELECTION  PETITIONS  [CHAP,  xvi 

While  it  was  going  on  the  retainers  in  the  election  petitions 
came  pouring  in. 

Stockport,  Gravesend,  Cheltenham,  Wallingford,  Maccles- 
field,  Salisbury,  Hereford,  Plymouth,  Colchester,  Evesham, 
Canterbury,  and  Sandwich  fell  to  my  share.  The  Colchester 
case  was  a  very  curious  one.  It  was  a  two-member  con- 
stituency, and  Mr.  Causton  (afterwards  Lord  Southwark) 
and  Mr.  William  Willis,  Q.C.,  were  the  Liberal  candidates, 
and  Sir  Francis  Jeune  (afterwards  Lord  St.  Helier  and 
President  of  the  Probate  and  Divorce  Division)  and  Colonel 
Learmonth  the  Conservatives.  The  Liberals  were  declared 
elected,  the  numbers  being,  Causton,  1,738;  Willis,  1,650; 
Learmonth,  1,649;  an^  Jeune,  1,528. 

But  there  had  been  several  ballot  papers  upon  the  validity 
of  which  the  Mayor  as  returning  officer  had  to  decide. 

These  were  afterwards  inspected  and  photographed,  and 
it  was  quite  clear  when  they  were  examined  that  three  or 
four  votes  had  been  improperly  admitted  or  rejected,  and 
that  on  the  votes  being  properly  counted  Mr.  Willis  was  one 
or  two  below  Colonel  Learmouth.  So  a  petition  was  lodged, 
claiming  the  seat  for  Learmouth,  and  an  application  was 
made  to  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  to  order  a  special  case 
to  be  stated  with  the  disputed  ballot  papers  attached  as 
exhibits,  and  upon  that  special  case  to  determine  which 
candidate  had  in  fact  the  majority  of  votes. 

Thereupon  the  Liberals  filed  an  answer  to  the  petition 
alleging  various  corrupt  practices  on  the  Conservative  side, 
and  the  Court  decided  that  it  could  not  deal  with  the 
question  of  the  validity  of  the  disputed  votes  without 
admitting  those  charges  to  be  tried  in  the  usual  fashion. 

There  had  been  a  good  deal  of  bribery  at  the  election,  and 
the  petition  was  withdrawn  ;  and  Mr.  Willis  sat  for  five 
years  as  member  for  Colchester  without  having  really  been 
elected  by  a  majority  of  votes. 

At  the  end  of  April  the  trials  of  the  election  petitions 
began,  and  for  the  first  time  each  was  heard  by  two  judges, 
a  change  which  had  been  chiefly  brought  about  by  the 
extraordinary  decisions  of  Baron  Martin  in  1874  in  the 


i88o]  GRAVESEND  175 

cases  of  Westminster  (where  Mr.  W.  H.  Smith  was  allowed 
to  enter  Parliament  after  an  election  which  had  been  won 
by  wholesale  bribery)  and  Cheltenham  and  Windsor. 

The  first  petition  tried,  and  the  longest  and  most  costly  of 
all,  was  that  of  Gravesend,  where  two  judges,  Denman  and 
Lopes,  arrived  on  April  30  th,  and  were  received  with  the 
same  state  as  Judges  of  Assize  and  housed  for  a  fortnight 
in  the  house  of  the  Town  Clerk.  The  petitioner  was  Sir 
Francis  Truscott,  then  Lord  Mayor  of  London,  who  had 
been  defeated  by  Mr.  Bevan,  a  large  employer  of  labour  at 
the  cement  works  on  the  riverside.  Charges  of  personal 
bribery  were  made  against  Mr.  Bevan,  and  the  seat  was 
claimed  for  Sir  Francis.  I  was  briefed  for  the  petitioner, 
with  Mr.  Day  to  lead  me  and  Robert  Biron  and  Lewis  Coward 
as  my  juniors.  On  the  other  side  were  Mr.  Lewis  Cave,  Q.C. 
(afterwards  a  judge),  Chandos  Leigh  (afterwards  Counsel 
to  the  Speaker),  and  Frank  Lockwood.  We  (the  Counsel) 
had  a  very  cheerful  time,  for  Day  and  Biron  and  Lockwood 
and  Lewis  Coward  were  the  merriest  four  that  could  have 
been  found  in  the  Temple.  There  was  one  night  when  we 
all  dined  together  at  the  hotel  where  the  petitioner's  counsel 
were  lodged,  and  I  remember  how,  very  late  in  the  evening, 
Cave,  who  was  the  most  solemn  of  elderly  lawyers,  and  all 
the  rest  of  us  except  Chandos  Leigh,  who  I  think  had  gone 
to  town,  danced  a  break-down  round  the  dinner  table,  while 
Coward  played  and  sang  nigger  melodies  at  the  piano. 
Lockwood  had  not  much  to  do  in  the  case,  and  he  produced 
quite  a  sheaf  of  drawings,  chiefly  of  his  serious  leader  dancing 
on  the  crystal  platform  at  Rosherville  Gardens. 

On  the  Monday  the  petitioner's  case  was  opened  and 
some  evidence  given,  and  on  Tuesday  I  was  there  doing  my 
share  of  examining  our  witnesses.  But  I  had  to  come  up 
to  town  that  night,  for  the  hearing  of  the  Cheltenham 
petition  was  fixed  for  the  next  day,  and  in  that  case  I  was 
leading  for  my  old  friend  Mr.  (now  Sir  James)  Agg  Gardner. 
He  was  not  the  petitioner,  for  the  election  had  not  been 
quite  so  pure  on  the  Conservative  side  as  to  make  it  safe  to 
claim  the  seat,  but  in  addition  to  the  charges  against  Baron 


I76  ELECTION  PETITIONS  [CHAP,  xvi 

de  Ferrieres  of  bribery  by  his  agents,  a  question  of  law  was 
raised  whether  a  special  Act  of  Parliament  by  which  he  had 
been  naturalised  some  years  before  had  the  effect  of  enabling 
him  to  sit  in  Parliament.  I  went  to  Cheltenham  having 
Godson  and  young  Amphlett  as  my  juniors,  and  Waddy, 
Q.C.,  Anstie  and  Willis  Bund  against  me.  On  the  Wednes- 
day I  opened  the  case  and  called  some  witnesses,  and  on 
the  Thursday  our  evidence  was  continued. 

But  our  witnesses  broke  down  in  the  way  which  is  quite 
usual  in  election  petitions,  and  it  was  clear  that  our  bribery 
case  would  fail.  So  on  Friday  I  interposed  the  argument 
on  the  point  of  law,  and  that  being  quite  rightly  decided 
against  me  I  withdrew  the  petition. 

The  next  day,  Saturday,  I  was  back  at  Gravesend,  where 
we  closed  our  evidence  and  Cave  began  his  speech.  But  I 
was  wanted  elsewhere,  and  so  long  as  Day  was  able  to  be 
at  Gravesend  I  was  of  no  great  use  there,  so  on  Monday, 
June  yth,  I  went  down  to  Evesham,  where  Baron  Pollock 
and  Sir  Henry  Hawkins  came  to  try  the  petition  against  Mr. 
Ratcliff,  a  Liverpool  merchant  who  had  been  returned  for 
that  tiny  constituency  by  382  votes  against  Sir  Algernon 
Bofthwick  (afterwards  Lord  Glenesk),  who  had  polled  373. 
The  bribery  here  had  really  been  of  the  simplest  possible 
kind. 

A  man  named  Ballinger,  who  was  a  shoemaker  in  the  little 
town,  was  employed  by  Mr.  Ratcliff  to  distribute  moneys. 
He  was  kept  supplied  with  funds,  and  had  a  book  in  which 
he  entered  the  names  of  the  persons  to  whom  from  time  to 
time  he  gave  small  sums.  It  was  suggested  that  this  was 
only  Mr.  Ratcliff *s  way  of  relieving  poverty  which  he  could 
not  himself  investigate,  but  the  political  motive  of  the  gifts 
was  at  least  as  evident  as  the  charity,  and  before  we  had 
gone  on  very  long  on  Tuesday  morning  it  was  admitted  that 
Ballinger  was  Mr.  Ratcliff 's  agent,  and  that  the  seat  could 
not  be  defended.  So  he  was  unseated  and  ordered  to  pay 
the  costs.  In  this  case,  again,  it  had  not  been  thought 
prudent  to  claim  the  seat  for  Sir  Algernon  Borthwick. 

On  the  Wednesday  morning,  I  was  back  at  Gravesend, 


i88o]  CANTERBURY  177 

and  the  evidence  for  the  respondent  was  closed,  and  after  a 
speech  from  Cave  the  recriminatory  evidence  against  Sir 
Francis  Truscott  was  commenced. 

On  the  Thursday  this  evidence  was  being  continued  when 
the  judges  interposed,  and  said  they  had  made  up  their 
minds  that  Mr.  Bevan  must  be  unseated  in  consequence  of 
the  general  bribery  which  they  were  satisfied  had  been 
committed.  Thereupon  Day  abandoned  the  claim  to  the 
seat,  but  notwithstanding  this  the  recriminatory  case  was 
proceeded  with  then  and  on  the  following  day.  On  the 
Saturday  morning  Mr.  Justice  Lopes  raised  the  point  that 
as  the  seat  must  be  declared  vacant  there  was  no  use  in 
going  on  with  this  recrimination,  and  after  short  argument 
this  view  was  agreed  to,  and  the  inquiry  closed  after  a  trial 
which  had  lasted  twelve  days,  and  cannot  have  cost  less 
than  £20,000.  Mr.  Bevan  was  unseated,  and  was  ordered 
to  pay  the  larger  part  of  the  costs. 

One  evening  during  that  trial  I  was  in  Rosherville  Gardens 
with  Mr.  Homewood  Crawford,  the  son-in-law  of  Sir  Francis 
Truscott,  who  was  then  a  private  solicitor,  but  afterwards 
became  solicitor  to  the  Corporation  of  the  City  of  London, 
and  I  told  him  how  it  had  been  my  ambition  from 
boyhood  to  be  member  for  the  City.  He  told  me  that  if 
ever  the  opportunity  came  he  would  give  me  his  best 
help,  and  twenty-six  years  later  he  thoroughly  fulfilled  his 
promise. 

The  next  Monday,  June  I4th,  I  went  to  Canterbury,  where 
Mr.  Butler  Johnstone,  who  had  been  one  of  the  Liberal  candi- 
dates at  the  election,  petitioned  against  the  return  of  the 
Hon.  A.  E.  Gathorne  Hardy  and  Colonel  Lawrie.  Denman 
and  Lopes  were  the  judges  here,  and  Murphy,  Q.C.,  Biron, 
and  Moulton  (afterwards  Lord  Moulton)  were  for  the 
petitioner,  while  I  appeared  for  Hardy  and  Laurie,  with 
Finlay  (now  Lord  Chancellor)  for  my  junior.  This  was  a 
very  serious  case.  The  seat  was  not  claimed,  for  there 
had  been  gross  corruption  on  both  sides.  The  principal 
person  concerned  on  the  Conservative  side  had  disappeared, 
and  the  party  managers  were  very  anxious  as  to  what  might 


178  ELECTION  PETITIONS  [CHAP,  xvi 

come  out.  Mr.  Gorst,  who  was  then  the  chief  Conservative 
agent,  sent  me  his  private  cypher  so  that  I  could  consult 
him  freely,  and  on  the  Monday  night  I  made  a  hurried  visit 
to  London  to  discuss  the  situation  with  him.  The  evidence 
was  continued  on  Tuesday,  but  on  Wednesday  the  personal 
charges  against  Hardy  and  Lawrie  were  withdrawn,  and  I 
thereupon  admitted  that  the  election  could  not  stand. 
The  respondents  were  allowed  to  make  statements  denying 
the  personal  charges  ;  the  election  was  declared  void  on  the 
ground  that  bribery  had  extensively  prevailed  ;  and  the 
judges  made  a  report  to  the  House  which  prevented  Canter- 
bury from  having  any  members  in  that  Parliament. 

I  had  now  one  day's  interval,  and  on  Friday  the  i8th  I 
went  down  to  Wallingford  with  Pollard  and  Nash  as  my 
juniors  to  support  the  petition  against  Mr.  Walter  Wren,  who 
had  won  the  seat  for  the  Liberals.  Here  again  the  seat  was 
not  claimed.  This  was  a  very  curious  case.  It  was  known 
that  there  had  been  bribery  on  both  sides,  but  the  actual 
evidence  which  had  been  obtained  when  the  petition  was 
lodged  was  very  scanty.  Indeed  A.  L.  Smith,  who  was  at 
our  first  consultation,  advised  that  it  should  be  abandoned. 
I  said  that  I  was  sure  the  judges  would  help  us  to  find  out 
the  truth,  and  that  I  meant  to  go  to  Wallingford  and  stay 
there  until  Wren  was  unseated.  Mr.  Walter  Wren  was  a 
man  of  great  ability,  who  was  the  most  successful  "  coach  " 
of  his  time  for  young  men  going  up  for  examinations, 
especially  those  for  the  army. 

He  went  down  to  Wallingford  and  announced  that  he 
would  not  have  any  committee.  He  took  a  house  in  the 
place  and  had  its  front  painted  red.  Then  he  hired  a 
wagonette  and  a  boy  who  could  blow  a  horn,  and  every 
morning  drove  out  from  the  little  town  into  the  agricultural 
districts  from  which  the  larger  number  of  the  small  con- 
stituency came.  At  the  cross-roads  he  had  the  horn  blown 
until  some  of  the  labourers  gathered  round  him,  and  then 
he  made  them  a  speech.  As  far  as  our  information  went, 
although  of  course  no  trustworthy  reports  could  be  obtained, 
these  speeches  had  very  little  to  do  with  politics,  and  con- 


i88o]  WALLINGFORD  179 

sisted  chiefly  of  the  most  lavish  promises  as  to  work  and 
wages.  I  think  the  judges  (Denman  and  Lopes)  were  rather 
puzzled  at  the  airy  indefiniteness  of  my  opening,  which  was 
all  we  had  time  for  on  the  Friday  afternoon. 

The  next  morning  while  I  was  at  breakfast  Murphy  (who 
appeared  for  Wren  with  Kemp  and  Torr)  came  to  see  me. 
He  asked  if  I  thought  I  could  fill  up  the  morning  with  wit- 
nesses who  did  not  speak  to  personal  bribery  by  Mr.  Wren. 
I  said,  "  Does  that  mean  you  are  going  to  surrender  ?  " 

"  Well/'  said  he,  "  it  is  possible  that  I  shall  not  deny 
agency/' 

I  told  him  I  understood,  and  would  do  what  I  could  to 
meet  him,  so  I  went  on  calling  witnesses  who  had  received 
half-crowns  from  a  travelling  tinker  who  was  in  the  habit 
of  going  round  the  neighbourhood  mending  pots  and  pans 
and  buying  rabbit  skins.  He  would  urge  the  man  to  vote 
for  Wren,  and  if  he  got  a  promise  a  half-crown  would  be 
found  under  the  mat  or  on  a  sideboard  after  he  went  away. 
The  weakness  of  this  part  of  the  case  was  that  we  could  not 
show  any  connection  between  this  man  and  Mr.  Wren. 
I  went  on  calling  witnesses  who  had  found  these  half-crowns 
and  had  generally  told  others  of  their  good  fortune,  and 
presently  Denman  said,  "  I  notice,  Mr.  Murphy,  you  do  not 
cross-examine  these  witnesses.  I  suppose  the  only  question 
will  be  one  of  agency." 

"  Oh,  my  lord/'  said  Murphy,  "  I  shall  have  to  admit  the 
agency." 

The  case  was  over ;  Mr.  Wren  was  unseated  and  ordered  to 
pay  the  costs,  and  it  was  explained  that  he  was  anxious  to 
deny  the  personal  charges,  but  was  not  well  enough  to  come 
into  court. 

So  my  third  victim  was  ousted  from  his  seat.  I  had  yet 
two  heavy  cases  to  deal  with,  those  of  Macclesfield  and 
Plymouth,  and  unfortunately  they  were  both  fixed  for  trial 
for  the  same  -day,  the  following  Monday,  June  2ist.  I  had 
no  special  interest  in  either,  but  at  Macclesfield  two  Liberal 
seats  were  being  attacked,  while  at  Plymouth  only  one  Con- 
servative had  succeeded,  and  was  being  petitioned  against 


i8o  ELECTION  PETITIONS  [CHAP,  xvi 

At  Macclesfield  I  was  leading  for  the  petition,  and  it 
might  have  been  difficult  to  replace  me  at  a  day's  notice, 
while  at  Plymouth  I  was  only  second  counsel  for  the  respon- 
dent, and  my  absence  on  the  Monday  could  not,  I  thought, 
be  of  great  importance.  So  I  wrote  to  my  Plymouth 
clients  putting  my  brief  at  their  disposal,  and  spent  the 
Saturday  (I  have  never,  except  on  rare  and  special  emer- 
gencies, done  any  legal  work  on  the  Sunday)  in  mastering 
the  voluminous  Macclesfield  brief. 

I  finished  this  task  as  I  travelled  down  to  Macclesfield 
on  the  Monday  morning,  and  when  it  was  finished  I  was 
very  dissatisfied  with  the  material  supplied  me. 

There  was  plenty  of  evidence  of  bribery  and  treating,  and 
I  had  no  difficulty  in  opening  a  strong  case,  but  when  we 
had  a  consultation  in  the  evening  I  pointed  out  to  my 
solicitor  client  that  almost  all  our  witnesses  described  them- 
selves as  ward  messengers  or  bill  posters  or  watchers,  and 
in  these  capacities  had  been  paid  ;  that  they  would  of  course 
be  asked  the  question,  and  that  by  the  time  we  had  called 
a  dozen  of  them  the  judges  would  see  that  the  bribery  was 
not  only  on  one  side.  I  asked  him  to  go  through  the  list 
and  give  me  the  names  of  those  who  had  not  been  paid. 

He  came  to  me  in  the  morning,  and  out  of  103  witnesses 
whose  evidence  was  set  out  in  the  brief  he  gave  me  a  list 
of  seven.  This  was  unsatisfactory,  so  I  cast  about  for  a 
means  of  escape  from  the  necessity  of  calling  any  witnesses 
at  all  from  our  own  side. 

We  had  one  little  bit  of  documentary  evidence  in  the 
shape  of  a  small  card  bearing  the  name  of  one  of  the  wards 
of  the  town  and  the  figure  3,  and  in  the  corner  the  initials 
J.  F.  T.  It  was  one  of  a  large  number  of  cards  which  had 
been  distributed  by  the  Liberals,  uid  had  been  accepted  at 
the  public-houses  and  shops  in  payment  for  drinks  and 
groceries.  It  bore  no  printer's  name,  but  I  was  told  that  it 
was  no  doubt  printed  by  the  publisher  of  the  Liberal  paper, 
who  did  practically  all  the  election  printing  on  that  side. 
I  asked  if  he  was  likely  to  be  in  court  that  morning,  and 
was  told  that  he  certainly  would.  He  was  the  chief 


I88o]  MACCLESFlELfi  181 

reporter  on  his  own  paper,  his  name  had  not  been  mentioned 
in  connection  with  the  petition,  and  he  would  be  sure  to  come 
to  do  his  ordinary  work.  I  called  two  short  witnesses  who 
were  of  no  importance,  and  then  I  called  George  Brown. 
Mr.  Brown  had  just  settled  himself  down  at  the  re- 
porters' table,  and  could  hardly  believe  his  ears  when  he 
was  invited  to  the  witness  box.  But  there  was  no  escape 
for  him,  and  he  was  duly  sworn. 

I  carefully  hid  the  card  under  my  papers,  and  began  to 
ask  him  about  his  newspaper,  whether  it  was  not  an  old- 
established  and  high-class  journal  and  so  on.  He  got  quite 
comfortable,  and  when  I  held  up  a  collection  of  ordinary 
election  posters  and  went  through  them,  asking  as  to  each 
whether  he  was  the  printer,  he  was  obviously  proud  of  his 
machining.  Then  I  took  out  the  little  card  and  asked  if 
he  printed  that.  He  hesitated,  and  became  suddenly  very 
ignorant  of  the  conduct  of  his  printing  business.  But  I 
told  him  I  was  sure  the  judges  would  take  care  that  before 
he  was  allowed  to  leave  the  witness  box  my  questions  should 
be  answered,  and  so  gradually  the  whole  story  came  out. 
The  questions  were  very  simple.  "  How  many  of  those 
cards  did  you  print  ?  "  "  Who  ordered  them  ?  "  "  Where 
were  they  delivered  ?  "  "  Who  paid  for  them  ?  "  "  Whose 
initials  were  those  in  the  corner  ?  "  "  Who  was  the  Liberal 
Chairman  in  that  ward  ?  "  "  Was  this  the  only  ward  for 
which  cards  were  printed  ?  "  "  Were  they  in  different 
colours  for  the  different  wards  ?  "  As  to  each  ward  the 
same  questions  as  to  orders  and  payments  and  the  names 
of  secretaries  and  chairman.  There  was  no  help  for  him. 
I  got  a  pretty  complete  account  of  the  way  in  which  thou- 
sands of  these  cards  had  been  distributed.  There  was  no 
need  to  go  further.  When,  with  the  perspiration  dropping 
from  his  face,  he  left  the  witness  box,  Mr.  Waddy  rose  and 
said  that  it  would  not  be  necessary  to  continue  the  investi- 
gation, as  he  could  not  defend  the  seat.  So  two  more 
Liberal  members  were  unseated,  and  I  took  the  midday 
train  back  to  London. 

Of  all  the  cases  which  came  before  me  at  this  time  I 
13 


i82  ELECTION  PETITIONS  [CHAP,  xvt 

think  Macclesfield  was  the  worst.  I  have  no  doubt  that  out 
of  the  5,000  voters  at  that  election  3,500  were  in  one  way 
or  another  bribed.  Apart  from  the  wholesale  distribution 
of  these  refreshment  cards  of  which  I  have  spoken,  there 
was  a  merely  colourable  employment  of  hundreds  of  the 
poorer  voters.  And  after  the  election  men  not  known  in 
Macclesfield,  "  men  in  the  moon  "  as  they  used  to  be  called, 
went  to  the  town  and  held  receptions  at  certain  public- 
houses  there. 

The  voters  to  whom  money  had  been  promised,  not  by 
any  means  all  poor  men,  went  there  and  passed  singly 
through  a  room  where  a  man  whom  they  did  not  know  gave 
them  money.  There  was  a  good  deal  of  ill-feeling  about 
the  petition,  which  was  considered  locally  a  shocking  breach 
of  faith.  The  two  local  solicitors  who  acted  as  party  agents 
had  agreed  upon  the  sum  which  each  of  them  was  to  spend 
as  he  liked  without  fear  of  attack.  The  Conservative  agent 
complained  to  me  that  his  opponent  had  broken  the  agree- 
ment and  spent  more.  It  was  a  satisfaction  that  a  com- 
mission was  appointed,  and  that  as  a  result  of  its  report 
Macclesfield  was  disfranchised  and  both  the  agents  were, 
sent  to  prison  for  six  months. 


CHAPTER   XVII 
PLYMOUTH:  1880 

LUSH  and  Manisty  were  the  judges  in  the  Plymouth  case, 
which  had  been  opened  on  the  Monday  afternoon  by  Arthur 
Collins,  K.C.  (afterwards  Chief  Justice  of  Bengal),  who  had 
for  his  junior  R.  S.  Wright  (afterwards  a  judge)  and  Latimer. 
Here  again  the  seat  was  not  claimed,  and  the  fact  that  this 
was  the  case  in  almost  every  petition  was  strong  evidence 
that  corrupt  practices  of  one  kind  and  another  had  been 
very  common. 

The  respondent  was  Sir  Edward  Bates,  a  wealthy  Liver- 
pool shipowner  who  had  sat  for  Plymouth  since  1874,  and 
the  principal  charges  were  of  general  bribery  by  the  dis- 
tribution by  him  of  boots  and  clothes  and  blankets,  but 
there  was  a  special  charge  of  having  induced  a  number 
of  Plymouth  trawlers  to  come  from  Penzance  to  vote  by 
promising  to  pay  the  share  of  the  boat  earnings  which  they 
might  lose  by  their  absence.  The  fact  was  that,  it  being 
then  lawful  to  pay  travelling  expenses,  a  certain  William 
Stibbs,  who  knew  well  the  Barbican  fishermen,  was  sent  to 
Penzance  with  instructions  to  pay  the  railway  fares  but 
nothing  more,  and  if  anything  more  were  asked  he  was  to 
telegraph  to  the  agent  at  Plymouth.  Of  course  the  men 
asked  for  their  share  of  profits,  and  Stibbs,  who  was  an 
ardent  Tory  himself,  used  some  expressions  in  reply,  more 
or  less  indefinite,  which  brought  them  all  up  to  Plymouth 
to  give  their  votes.  When  I  found  I  could  not  get  to 
Plymouth  until  Wednesday,  I  telegraphed  to  ask  if  I  should 
return  my  brief,  and  had  a  reply  begging  me  to  come  down 
the  moment  I  was  free.  So  on  the  Wednesday  morning 

183 


184  PLYMOUTH  [CHAP,  xvn 

I  travelled  down,  and  on  my  way  read  the  report  of  the 
first  day's  evidence  and  found  that  my  leader  had  made 
a  fatal  mistake.  Two  of  the  trawlers  had  been  called,  and 
given  evidence  that  Stibbs  had  said  it  would  be  all  right, 
and  so  on,  and  Day,  in  order  to  save  time,  had  agreed  to 
accept  their  evidence  as  that  of  the  whole  twenty.  No 
doubt  the  petitioners  had  put  forward  the  witnesses  they 
had  reason  to  think  most  favourable  to  them  ;  if  they  had 
been  forced  to  call  the  others  it  was  almost  certain  that 
there  would  have  been  discrepancies  and  perhaps  contra- 
dictions which  would  have  enabled  the  judges,  as  it  subse- 
quently appeared  they  would  gladly  have  done,  to  give  Sir 
Edward  Bates  the  benefit  of  the  doubt  in  a  case  where  he 
had  tried  to  take  precautions  against  a  breach  of  the  law. 
But  upon  the  evidence  so  accepted  there  could  be  only 
one  result,  and  when  the  judgement  came  the  judges,  while 
acquitting  Sir  Edward  Bates  of  any  corrupt  motive  in  his 
generous  gifts,  and  expressing  great  regret  that  they  were 
obliged  to  decide  against  him  on  this  particular  part  of 
the  case,  declared  his  election  void.  The  judgement  was 
given  on  Friday,  June  25th,  and  I  went  home  the  same 
night. 

Next  day  a  cousin  of  my  wife  was  married,  and  after  the 
wedding  I  took  her  sisters  to  Richmond  and  afterwards  to 
the  theatre.  Reaching  home  after  midnight,  I  found  a 
telegram  from  Plymouth  saying  that  the  Executive  Com- 
mittee of  the  Conservative  Association  had  resolved  to  ask 
me  to  be  their  candidate  at  the  by-election.  On  Sunday 
morning  I  went  to  W.  H.  Smith  at  Hertford  Street,  and 
asked  his  advice,  telling  him  that  I  felt  myself  to  some 
extent  pledged  to  Southwark,  but  that  I  would  do  what  he 
thought  best  for  the  party. 

He  urged  me  to  accept,  so  I  went  a  telegram  to  Plymouth, 
went  down  by  the  morning  train  on  Manday,  wrote  my 
address  in  the  train,  was  received  in  Plymouth  with  bound- 
less enthusiasm,  and  spoke  that  night  to  two  great  meetings. 
My  opponent  was  an  old  friend  of  mine,  a  barrister  I  had 
met  at  the  Hardwicke  Society,  Sir  George  Young. 


1880]  AGAIN .  A  CANDIDATE  185 

He  had  fought  Plymouth  twice,  and  at  the  late  election 
had  been  only  twenty-five  votes  below  Sir  Edward  Bates. 

But  the  excitement  of  the  election  was  too  much  for  him, 
and  he  made  some  foolish  speeches.  He  called  me  Sir 
Edward  Bates' s  pocket-piece  "  of  brass  with  just  a  taste 
of  the  pewter,"  and  talked  about  "  the  two  Neddies  being 
drawn  from  the  station  by  other  Neddies." 

A  report  was  spread  about,  for  which  he  was  in  no  way 
responsible,  that  I  was  in  money  difficulties,  and  had  left 
Southwark  without  paying  my  election  expenses.  I  tried 
to  trace  the  rumour  to  its  source,  and  found  it  had  been  set 
about  by  a  prominent  Liberal  tradesman.  I  went  to  him 
with  my  solicitor,  assured  him  of  its  untruth,  and  demanded 
a  retractation  and  apology.  He  made  the  apology,  and  pro- 
mised to  undo  as  far  as  he  could  the  mischief  it  had  caused. 
That  night  I  had  a  great  meeting  at  the  Guildhall.  I  stated 
the  rumour,  and  asked  all  who  had  heard  it  to  hold  up 
their  hands.  Two  or  three  hundred  hands  went  up.  Then 
I  gave  it  the  most  absolute  contradiction,  said  that  not  a 
single  Southwark  debt  was  outstanding,  and  that  although 
I  was  not  a  rich  man  I  was  bearing  the  whole  cost  of  this 
election  myself,  and  that  I  could  do  so  half-a-dozen  times 
over,  and  yet  have  something  to  leave  my  children.  I  told 
them  how  I  had  traced  the  slander  and  confronted  the  man 
who  had  repeated  it.  They  shouted  for  his  name.  That  I 
refused  to  give.  He  had,  I  said,  made  an  apology  and 
promised  to  try  to  make  amends,  and  I  would  not  hold 
him  up  to  the  anger  of  his  fellow- townsmen.  The  incident 
did  me  much  good,  and  by  the  eve  of  the  polling  my  friends 
were  confident.  There  were  5,500  electors,  and  we  had 
returns  of  promises  from  2,831  :  1,729  were  returned  as 
against  us.  Making  the  full  deduction  of  15  per  cent,  from 
our  promises,  and  counting  against  us  all  those  returned 
as  doubtful,  we  counted  on  polling  2,406  and  expected 
to  win. 

On  the  polling  day  I  was,  as  always,  at  the  central  com- 
mittee room  by  eight  o'clock,  and  I  spent  the  whole  morning 
and  the  early  afternoon  in  driving  round  the  polling 


i86  PLYMOUTH  [CHAP,  xvn 

stations  inspecting  the  returns,  and  keeping  up  the  enthu- 
siasm of  my  friends. 

About  3  o'clock  it  was  clear  I  could  do  no  more,  so  I  went 
into  the  billiard  room  of  the  Globe  Hotel,  and  found  a 
stranger  there  who  suggested  a  game.  As  we  played  he 
said,  "  I  wish  I  knew  who  was  going  to  win  this  election ; 
I  was  offered  3  to  i  just  now  against  Clarke." 

"  Oh,"  said  I,  "  you  had  better  not  waste  your  time 
playing  billiards ;  go  and  take  3  to  i  wherever  you  can  get 
it." 

"  What,  do  you  know  anything  about  it  ?  " 

"  Not  much,"  said  I,  "  but  I  am  Clarke." 

He  slipped  out  of  the  room.  Whether  he  took  any  bets 
I  never  knew,  but  I  rather  think  he  believed  I  was  a  lunatic 
whom  the  excitement  of  the  election  had  distraught. 

Canon  Mansfield,  a  dear  old  Roman  Catholic  priest  who 
had  helped  me  greatly  during  the  canvass,  came  to  the 
Globe  to  sit  with  me  while  the  votes  were  being  counted. 
Sir  Edward  Bates  was  with  us.  The  result  was  expected 
to  be  known  by  6  o'clock,  and  when  that  hour  passed  and 
we  heard  nothing  Sir  Edward  grew  very  excited.  From 
the  window  at  which  we  sat  we  saw  but  few  people  in  the 
streets,  for  the  crowd  had  pressed  into  the  Guildhall  Square. 
Slowly  the  minutes  passed.  A  quarter  past.  Half-past. 
Suddenly  a  dull  roar  of  cheering  from  the  Square ;  next 
moment  the  crowd  bursting  into  the  broad  space  before  us 
and  rushing  towards  the  hotel.  In  front  came  a  young 
helper  of  ours,  J.  P.  Rogers,  known  familiarly  as  "  the  fat 
boy,"  wildly  waving  his  arms.  In  two  minutes  more  the 
hotel  was  filled  with  a  shouting  crowd,  and  in  front  of  us  a 
surging  mass  of  four  or  five  thousand  people  filled  the  place 
from  wall  to  wall  and  shouted  for  a  speech,  and  it  was 
long  before  Sir  Edward  Bates  and  I,  after  coming  again 
and  again  to  the  window,  could  get  away  to  our  room,  and 
take  a  little  of  the  rest  which  both  wanted. 

The  figures  of  the  polling  were  :  Clarke,  2,449  >  Young, 
2,305. 

This  was  a  great  triumph  for  me.    Less  than  five  months 


i88o]  AGAIN  A  MEMBER  187 

had  passed  since  I  was  elected  for  Southwark.  Since  then 
I  had  made  my  speech  in  the  House,  I  had  become  a  Queen's 
Counsel,  I  had  fought  at  Southwark  again  and  been  beaten  ; 
in  eight  election  petitions  I  had  earned  nearly  £3,000,  and 
had  helped  to  unseat  five  Liberal  members;  and  the  last 
petition  had  opened  to  me  the  seat  for  a  place  of  which  I 
knew  nothing  until  four  days  before  I  became  a  candidate. 
Now  by  the  polling  I  had  become  the  senior  member  for  a 
town  as  beautiful  in  its  situation,  as  interesting  in  its  history, 
as  important  in  its  character,  and  its  direct  connection  with 
the  public  service,  as  any  city  in  the  land,  and  although  I 
did  not  then  know  it  I  was  destined  to  be  re-elected  five 
times  and  to  represent  it  without  a  break,  and  in  the 
happiest  of  political  relations  with  my  constituents,  for  a 
period  of  nearly  twenty  years ;  longer  than  Plymouth  had 
been  represented  by  any  of  its  members,  and  longer  than  any 
town  connected  with  dockyard  and  service  interests  was  ever 
represented  by  the  same  member. 

The  time  at  last  came  when  the  voice  of  Duty,  quite 
clearly  heard,  laid  commands  upon  me  to  take  a  course 
which  my  constituents  so  bitterly  resented  that  they  expelled 
me  from  their  service,  and  took  away  from  me  the  position 
which  was  the  greatest  pleasure  and  pride  of  my  public 
life.  I  thought  I  was  ungenerously  treated  ;  the  blow  was 
very  heavy,  and  the  wound  is  not  yet  healed.  But  it  is  no 
longer  painful,  and  as  I  write  these  lines  I  think  only  of  the 
delight  of  those  happy  years,  when  I  served  a  constituency 
which  gave  me  every  token  of  confidence  and  regard  ; 
where  every  year  in  their  noble  Guildhall  I  spoke,  always 
to  a  great  audience,  on  great  public  questions ;  and  where 
I  found  friendships  which  cheered  and  strengthened  me 
and  which  I  remember  with  gratitude  and  pride  to-day. 


CHAPTER   XVIII 

CHIEFLY  DOMESTIC  :    1880-1894 

DURING  the  latter  part  of  the  year  1880  my  dear  wife's 
disease  made  sad  progress.  We  spent  the  early  autumn  at 
Worthing  with  the  children,  and  then  I  took  her  for  some 
weeks  to  Devonshire.  But  she  had  become  very  thin  and 
frail,  and  the  dreadful  cough  gave  her  little  rest  by  night 
or  day.  When  we  came  back  to  town  the  doctors  insisted 
that  I  should  no  longer  sleep  in  her  room,  and  her  married 
cousin  came  to  be  her  nurse  and  to  take  charge  of  the  house- 
hold. But  every  night  when  I  reached  home,  however 
late  it  might  be,  she  was  always  awake,  and  we  spent  some 
time  together. 

As  I  watched  her  gradual  failure  I  learned  to  know  how 
strong  our  love  had  been.  And  I  was  troubled,  I  hope 
without  reason,  by  the  haunting  fear  which  adds  a  sharp 
pang  to  the  sorrowful  anxiety  of  watching  a  long  and  hope- 
less illness,  the  fear  lest  familiarity  with  the  sorrow  should 
in  any  degree  have  lessened  the  keenness  of  one's  sympathy 
with  the  sufferer  or  the  diligence  of  one's  care. 

Soon  after  Christmas  I  took  her  to  the  south  coast  for  a 
week  or  two  ;  she  could  scarcely  bear  the  journey,  but  had 
wished  to  be  alone  with  me  on  her  last  birthday,  February 
4th.  When  we  came  back  to  London  it  was  evident  that 
the  end  was  near.  But  she  lived  on  through  February. 

On  the  night  of  March  2nd  I  stayed  on  by  her  bedside 
thinking  that  the  last  hour  had  come,  but  she  said,  "Go 
to  bed,  dear,  I  shall  not  die  to-night,  I  am  not  quite  ready." 

The  next  night  I  wanted  to  stay  with  her,  but  she  would 

|88 


i88o-94]  A   FALLING   ASLEEP  189 

not  let  me.  "  Good-night,"  she  said,  "  it  may  be  to-night, 
for  I  am  quite  ready,  but  cousin  Ann  will  call  you." 

About  three  in  the  morning  there  was  a  knock  at  the 
door.  I  hurried  to  her  room,  but  was  too  late. 

Almost  in  sleep,  with  no  word,  but  only  a  sigh,  she  had 
passed  away. 


The  year  1881  was  marked  by  two  national  misfortunes 
the  full  importance  of  which  was  not  realised  until  much 
later.  The  first  was  the  death  of  the  great  Earl  of  Beacons- 
field,  the  second  the  defeat  of  Majuba  Hill.  Parliament  was 
dull ;  the  chief  excitement  consisting  in  the  Bradlaugh  con- 
troversy, which  answered  the  main  purpose  of  its  authors 
by  seriously  embarrassing  Mr.  Gladstone,  whose  majority  in 
the  House  of  Commons  was  already  rapidly  diminishing. 
I  took  little  part  in  debate,  but  towards  the  end  of  the 
session  I  put  down  on  the  notice  paper  a  motion  that  the 
discussion  of  Bills  which  had  passed  their  second  reading 
in  one  session,  but  had  not  become  law,  should  be  resumed 
in  the  following  session  at  the  stage  of  Committee.  Of  the 
fortunes,  or  rather  the  misfortunes  of  this  proposal,  the 
only  method  by  which  the  House  of  Commons  will  ever 
recover  its  capacity  of  public  service,  I  shall  speak  in  a  later 
chapter. 

My  home  affairs  had,  of  course,  to  be  ordered  afresh. 
Huntingdon  Lodge  was  particularly  inconvenient  for 
Parliamentary  work,  so  I  took  and  furnished  a  pleasant 
little  set  of  rooms  at  Belgrave  Mansions  just  by  Victoria 
Station,  and  only  spent  the  week-ends  at  my  Peckham 
home.  There  my  eldest  sister,  who  had  long  experience  as 
a  governess,  took  charge  of  the  house  and  of  my  two  young 
children.  My  father  had  given  up  his  business  some  years 
before,  and  now  he  and  my  mother,  whose  health  was 
rapidly  failing,  left  their  house  at  Holloway,  and  came  to 
live  in  mine.  The  summer  was  uneventful,  and  as  soon 
as  I  could  get  away  I  went  off  to  Switzerland,  and  spent  a 
few  weeks  with  my  friend  Edward  Pinches  and  his  wife 


CHIEFLY  DOMESTIC  [CHAP,  xvm 

at   a    modest    boarding-house    called    the   Pension    Suter, 
delightfully  situated  on  the  hill  behind  Lucerne. 

That  holiday  over  I  came  back  resolved  to  take  up 
political  work  more  vigorously  than  ever,  and  I  soon  had 
the  opportunity  of  speaking  upon  the  same  platform  as  the 
two  leaders  of  the  Conservative  party.  The  death  of  Lord 
Beaconsfield  found  Lord  Salisbury  well  established  in  the 
leadership  of  the  House  of  Lords,  while  Sir  Stafford  North- 
cote,  if  he  could  hardly  be  said  to  lead  the  Conservatives  in 
the  House  of  Commons,  at  all  events  strolled  in  front  of  them 
and  was  recognised  as  their  nominal  chief,  and  this  dual 
headship  lasted  until  upon  Mr.  Gladstone's  defeat  four  years 
later  the  Queen  quite  rightly  sent  for  the  stronger  of  the 
two  statesmen,  who  thus  became  the  leader  of  the  whole 
party. 

It  was  arranged  that  a  great  meeting  should  be  held  at 
Newcastle  in  October  at  which  the  two  chiefs  would  appear 
together,  and  I  felt  myself  highly  honoured  in  being  asked 
to  join  the  party  and  propose  the  resolution  of  confidence  in 
our  leaders.  Everything  possible  was  done  to  give  import- 
ance to  the  demonstration.  Lord  Salisbury  and  Sir  Stafford 
Northcote  stayed  with  the  Duke  of  Northumberland  at 
Alnwick  Castle.  I  spent  two  very  pleasant  days  at  Blagdon 
as  the  guest  of  Sir  Matthew  Ridley  and  his  beautiful  wife. 
One  day  was  given  to  a  sort  of  triumphant  procession  down 
the  Tyne.  Twelve  gaily  flagged  steamers  went  slowly  down 
the  river,  while  bells  were  rung  and  banners  waved  and 
sirens  shrieked  and  hooted,  and  there  came  from  the  banks 
the  shouts  of  workmen  and  the  clanging  tumult  which  be- 
tokened the  welcome  of  the  coaly  town.  The  leaders  stood 
together  on  the  first  boat ;  on  the  second  I  had  the  un- 
looked-for pleasure  of  being  introduced  to  Mr.  Joseph 
Cowen,  then  member  for  Newcastle,  who  with  other  Liberal 
leaders  joined  in  the  welcome  to  the  two  distinguished 
visitors  to  the  town. 

It  was  charming  to  see  Lady  Ridley  lavishing  her  smiles 
and  attentions  on  the  rugged  republican. 

So  far  as  numbers  were  concerned,  the  evening  meeting 


1880-94]  A  GREAT   MEETING  191 

was  a  great  success.  The  Circus  was  crowded  by  some  five 
thousand  people,  full  of  expectation  and  enthusiasm.  But 
the  speaking  was  somewhat  heavy.  Lord  Salisbury  was  a 
fine  speaker.  But  his  carefully  prepared  and  well-balanced 
sentences,  his  deliberate  utterance,  the  even  tones  of  his 
sonorous  voice,  and  the  quiet  dignity  of  his  delivery,  were 
better  suited  to  a  great  debate  in  the  House  of  Lords,  or  to 
a  Guildhall  banquet,  than  to  the  restless  excitement  of  a 
public  meeting.  He  made  a  powerful  speech,  but  it  was 
dull,  and  a  dull  speech  to  a  passionate  audience  is  always 
disappointing.  Sir  Stafford  Northcote  was  unfortunate. 
He  was  obviously  nervous,  and  by  some  ill  chance  an  empty 
chair  had  been  left  on  the  platform  just  in  front  of  his 
seat.  He  gripped  the  back  of  this  chair,  and  tilted  it  back- 
wards and  forwards  through  the  whole  of  his  speech  until 
he  made  those  of  us  on  the  platform  almost  as  nervous  as 
himself.  But  this  state  of  things  gave  me  a  great  oppor- 
tunity, and  to  be  welcomed  as  I  was  upon  such  an  occasion 
helped  me  to  succeed,  and  my  speech  was,  I  think,  one  of 
the  best  I  ever  made.1  Lord  Salisbury  was  especially 
generous  in  his  congratulations  on  the  following  day,  and 
from^that  time  to  the  day  of  his  death  he  treated  me  with 
a  personal  kindness  and  consideration  which  added  greatly 
to  the  pleasure  of  my  political  work. 

With  Sir  Stafford  Northcote  I  was  already  upon  the 
pleasantest  terms  of  friendship.  When  I  came  back  to  the 
House  of  Commons  after  my  election  for  Plymouth,  I  met 
Randolph  Churchill  in  the  Lobby  before  I  had  taken  my 
seat,  and  he  urged  me  to  come  and  sit  below  the  gangway 
with  him  and  Balfour  and  Gorst  and  Wolff.  "  You  had 
much  better  join  us,"  he  said.  "  Sitting  up  there  behind 
the  Old  Goat,  you  will  never  have  any  fun  at  all."  I  de- 
clined the  invitation  ;  and  my  usual  seat  was  on  the  second 
bench,  where  Henry  Northcote  and  I  sat  together  just 
behind  the  leaders. 

A  few  weeks  before  the  Newcastle  meeting  I  had  a  letter 
from  Sir  Stafford  saying  that  there  were  two  subjects  upon 
1  See  Fraser's  Magazine,  November  1881. 


I92  CHIEFLY  DOMESTIC  [CHAP,  xvm 

which  he  wished  to  consult  me,  and  that  he  hoped  when  we 
met  at  Newcastle  we  should  be  able  to  discuss  them.  One 
was  the  very  large  increase  which  had  just  taken  place 
in  the  number  of  Parliamentary  electors,  and  the  other  the 
notice  of  motion  which  I  had  given  in  favour  of  carrying 
on  Bills  from  one  session  to  another.  He  said  he  would 
rather  the  notice  had  not  been  given,  but'  as  it  was  a  fait 
accompli  he  would  like  me  to  consider  whether  I  could  not 
qualify  it  in  some  way.  I  knew  we  should  have  no  oppor- 
tunity of  talking  it  over  at  Newcastle,  so  I  sent  him  a  long 
letter  which  he  said  put  my  case  very  well  and  deserved 
careful  consideration.  I  heard  no  more  from  Sir  Stafford 
upon  this  subject,  and  the  motion  came  on  for  debate  on 
February  2ist,  1882.  Unfortunately  on  that  evening  we 
had  one  of  the  Bradlaugh  disturbances,  which  lasted  for 
an  hour  and  a  half  and  was  very  violent.  When  that  was 
over  the  House  seemed  very  disinclined  to  address  itself 
to  a  new  subject.  I  spoke  in  the  dinner  hour  to  a  small 
audience,  and  the  debate  which  followed  was  dull  and  un- 
important. The  leaders  on  both  sides  absented  themselves, 
while  the  obstructors  on  both  sides  resisted  the  proposal. 
As  Lord  Salisbury  was  in  favour  of  it,  and  had  himself  in 
1869  made  a  very  powerful  speech  in  its  support,  Sir  Stafford 
could  not  well  take  the  other  side,  and  it  was  quite  character- 
istic of  his  methods  of  leadership  that  he  should  himself 
leave  the  House,  but  make  no  objection  to  his  son  Henry 
seconding  the  motion  and  telling  with  me  in  the  division. 
We  were  defeated  by  126  to  61  ;  and  eight  years  passed 
before  I  had  the  opportunity  of  taking  any  further  step 
towards  this  great  reform.  The  next  Parliament  lasted 
only  five  months,  and  in  that  of  1886  I  was  Solicitor- 
General,  and  was  of  course  debarred  from  taking  any  public 
initiative  in  such  a  matter. 

The  other  subject  on  which  Sir  Stafford  Northcote  desired 
to  consult  me,  the  great  increase  in  the  number  of  electors, 
was  connected  with  a  curious  bit  of  Parliamentary  history. 

In  the  year  1878  the  House  of  Commons,  by  passing  the 
Registration  of  Voters  Bill  without  full  consideration,  made, 


i88o-94]         AN  ENLARGED  CONSTITUENCY  193 

without  knowing  or  intending  it,  a  very  large  extension  of 
the  Parliamentary  franchise.  The  clause  which  did  this 
was  scarcely  noticed  until  three  years  later,  when  Sir  William 
Harcourt,  then  Home  Secretary,  issued  a  circular  to  vestry 
clerks  and  overseers  reminding  them  that  every  person 
inhabiting  part  of  a  house  was  entitled  to  be  put  upon  the 
register.  The  result  at  Plymouth  was  that  the  constituency 
was  almost  trebled.  In  1880  the  number  of  voters  was 
about  5,500.  In  the  register  which  came  into  force  in 
January  1882  the  number  was  very  nearly  14,000.  I  at 
once  took  steps  to  get  into  touch  with  the  new  electors.  I 
felt  that  it  was  my  first  duty,  and  clearly  my  interest,  to 
take  an  opportunity,  if  possible,  of  presenting  myself  before 
them  in  their  different  wards,  and  expounding  to  them  at 
some  length  my  opinions  upon  'the  principal  political  topics 
of  the  day.  So  instead  of  having  one  large  open  meeting 
at  the  Guildhall,  as  after  this  time  was  my  constant  practice, 
I  held  four  meetings  in  different  parts  of  the  town,  and  sent 
out  tickets  of  admission  to  all  the  electors  in  the  different 
wards.  In  one  of  these  speeches  I  dealt  very  fully  with 
the  condition  of  Ireland  ;  in  another  with  the  question  of 
Parliamentary  Reform  ;  one  was  devoted  to  Foreign  Policy, 
and  in  the  fourth  I  dealt  very  fully  with  Tariff  Reform,  which 
was  then  known  by  the  more  accurate  and  more  attractive 
title  of  Fair  Trade.  This  latter  speech  I  included  in  the 
volume  of  Selected  Speeches,  published  in  1908,  in  order 
that  it  should  vindicate  my  title  to  be  considered  one  of 
the  earliest  and  most  consistent  of  Tariff  Reformers. 

My  work  at  the  Bar  was  at  this  time  steadily  increasing. 
I  had  had  the  pleasant  and  very  exceptional  experience  of 
finding  that  my  taking  silk  had  not  caused  even  a  temporary 
reduction  of  income.  It  generally  does.  I  have  known 
cases  where  incomes  of  two  or  three  thousand  a  year  fall 
to  a  few  hundreds,  and  I  have  always  advised  my  friends 
never  to  ask  for  a  silk  gown  unless  they  had  saved  or  in- 
herited enough  to  assure  them  a  private  income  of  at  least 
a  thousand  a  year.  The  Election  Petitions  of  1880,  of  course, 
accounted  for  much  of  the  income  of  that  year ;  but  the 


194  CHIEFLY  DOMESTIC  [CHAP,    xvm 

5,969  guineas  which  my  fee-book  showed  for  1880  was 
followed  by  6,544  f°r  1881,  and  the  average  of  the  three 
years  1881-1883  was  7,293. 

The  spring  Assize  of  this  latter  year  brought  me  the  most 
interesting  case  which  had  come  my  way  since  the  great 
cases  of  1877.  A  young  child  disappeared  one  day  from  her 
home  in  Pimlico,  and  a  fortnight  later  her  body  was  found 
in  the  river  Medway,  at  Yalding.  A  heavy  brick  had  been 
placed  upon  the  chest,  and  fastened  with  strong  wire  wound 
about  the  body.  A  young  married  woman  named  Esther 
Pay,  who  had  been  the  mistress  of  the  child's  father,  himself 
a  married  man,  was  soon  afterwards  arrested,  charged  with 
the  murder,  and  committed  for  trial.  She  was  identified  as 
the  person  in  whose  company  the  child  had  last  been  seen 
in  London ;  she  had  then  for  some  time  been  absent  from 
her  home,  and  had  given  a  false  account  of  her  movements  ; 
and  the  place  where  the  body  was  found  was  near  the  end 
of  a  pathway  which  led  to  the  cottage  in  which  her  parents 
lived.  I  accepted  the  brief  for  the  defence,  and  the  trial 
took  place  at  Lewes  on  April  25th,  26th,  and  27th  before 
Baron  Pollock. 

It  was  a  trial  of  immense  dramatic  interest,  and  resulted 
in  a  verdict  of  acquittal.  I  have  told  the  full  story  else- 
where.1 Unfortunately  no  full  report  was  taken  of  my 
speech. 

The  most  important  incident  of  my  life  in  1882  was  my 
remarriage.  I  had  resolved  that  when  the  accustomed  year 
of  mourning  was  over  I  would  find  myself  another  wife. 
For  more  than  fourteen  years  I  had  enjoyed  the  constant 
society  of  a  loving  woman,  and  I  could  not  resign  myself 
to  loneliness.  And  my  two  children  were  so  young  (Ethel 
was  only  five  years  old  when  her  mother  died)  that  it  would 
be  possible  for  another  woman,  especially  if  she  were  one 
whom  they  already  knew  and  loved,  to  knit  again  the 
broken  strands  of  the  home  life  and  to  give  to  their  child- 
hood and  youth  the  comfort  of  a  mother's  care.  Kathleen 
Bryant  was  their  second  cousin  on  their  mother's  side,  and 

1  The  Cornhill  Magazine,  January  1916. 


i88o-94]  I   MARRY  AGAIN  195 

they  knew  her  better  and  were  more  attached  to  her  than 
to  any  other  relative  ;  for  during  their  mother's  long  illness 
she  had  very  often  been  with  us,  helping  to  take  care  of  them. 
It  was  not  until  many  years  later  that  I  heard  that  my  dear 
one  not  long  before  her  death  had  expressed  the  hope  that  in 
seeking  a  second  wife  my  choice  should  fall  upon  her.  She 
was  at  this  time  twenty-four  years  of  age ;  the  interval 
between  her  age  and  mine  being  exactly  that  which  promised 
a  long- continued  happiness  in  married  life.  Tall,  of  perfect 
figure,  fair  complexion,  beautiful  features,  clear  blue  eyes, 
and  bright  golden  hair,  she  was  the  prettiest  girl  I  knew. 
Gradually  the  intention  to  ask  her  to  be  my  wife  formed 
itself  in  my  mind,  but  my  time  and  thought  were  very  full 
of  law  and  politics ;  she  seemed  rather  to  avoid  than  to 
seek  my  company,  and  I  think  the  end  of  the  year  would 
have  found  me  still  a  widower  if  it  had  not  been  that  on 
July  3ist  she  came  with  me  to  see  Romeo  and  Juliet  at  the 
Lyceum  Theatre.  That  tender  tragedy  of  Love's  fair  ban- 
quet, spiced  with  the  dust  of  death,  moved  us  both  deeply. 

It  was  not  the  acting,  for  Henry  Irving  and  Ellen  Terry, 
an  incomparable  Benedick  and  Beatrice,  were  ill-fitted  to 
play  the  young  lovers  of  Verona.  Two  years  later  we  saw 
on  the  same  stage  the  ideal  Romeo  and  Juliet  in  the 
youthful  manliness  of  William  Terriss  and  the  innocent 
beauty  of  Mary  Anderson.  But  no  defect  in  acting  can 
calm  the  passion  of  the  play. 

As  for  me, 


"  The  soul  of  the  rose  went  into  my  blood, 
As  the  music  clashed  in  the  hall," 


and  although  I  said  nothing  that  night  my  mind  was  made 
up.  The  next  afternoon  I  asked  Kathleen  Bryant  to  be 
content  with  a  short  engagement  and  a  very  quiet  wedding, 
and  to  marry  me  on  August  I2th,  and  go  to  Switzerland 
with  me  for  the  first  part  of  my  long  vacation. 

She  hesitated,  demurred,  then  accepted,  and  at  the  end 
of  the  following  week  we  were  married  at  St.  Giles's,  Camber- 


196  CHIEFLY  DOMESTIC  [CHAP,  xvnt 

well,  and  went  to  spend  a  couple  of  days  at  the  Lord  Warden 
at  Dover  on  our  way  to  the  Continent. 

My  dear  wife  proved  to  be  a  delightful  companion,  an 
admirable  housekeeper,  and  an  incomparable  nurse. 

There  has  never  been  a  time  during  our  thirty-five  years 
of  happy  married  life  when  I  have  not  been  grateful  for  the 
enjoyment  of  her  faithful  and  loving  companionship. 

We  spent  a  few  happy  weeks  abroad,  and  then  came 
back  to  prepare  for  a  political  trip  to  the  North  of  England, 
which  had  been  arranged  in  consequence  of  the  great  success 
of  my  Newcastle  speech. 

It  was  rather  a  trying  experience  for  a  young  bride  ;  for 
although  we  were  entertained  at  pleasant  houses,  we  were 
among  entire  strangers,  and  much  of  my  time  was  filled 
with  political  conferences  and  the  preparation  of  the  speeches 
which  were  delivered  to  large  audiences  at  Durham,  Dar- 
lington, Sunderland,  and  Hartlepool.  The  most  interesting 
house  we  stayed  at  was  Halnaby,  the  residence  of  Mr. 
Wilson  Todd,  where  we  slept  in  the  same  room  and  bed 
which  were  occupied  by  Lord  Byron  and  his  wife  on  their 
wedding  night,  when  the  unhappy  poet  awoke  and,  seeing 
the  red  curtains,  fancied  himself  in  hell. 

I  had  a  special  piece  of  good  fortune  in  this  trip  in  the 
admirable  reporting  of  my  speeches  by  a  young  reporter 
who  was  sent  by  The  Western  Morning  News  to  accompany 
my  progress  from  town  to  town.  This  man  was  Henry  E. 
Duke.  We  then  improved  into  friendship  the  acquaintance 
which  had  begun  at  Plymouth,  and  it  has  been  my  privilege 
to  be  of  some  use  to  him  in  the  career  which,  resembling  my 
own  in  its  course  through  the  Reporters'  Gallery  to  the 
Bar  and  Parliament,  has  led  him  now  to  the  high  post — of 
honour  and  of  danger— of  the  Chief  Secretaryship  for  Ireland. 
A  sound  lawyer,  an  impressive  speaker,  calm  in  judgment, 
firm  in  decision,  of  untiring  industry  and  of  unswerving 
rectitude,  he  is  admirably  qualified  for  dealing  with  the 
difficult  problems  of  Irish  Government. 

When  the  North  Country  trip  was  over  we  went  down 
to  Plymouth  for  the  annual  meeting  of  the  Conservative 


i88o-94l         WE  GO  TO  RUSSELL  SQUARE  197 

Association,  which  was  always  held  about  the  beginning  of 
October,  and  here  my  young  wife  was  not  quite  so  happy. 
The  new  chairman  of  the  party,  Mr.  W.  H.  Hawker,  was 
not  master  in  his  own  house,  where  he  was  not  allowed  to 
smoke  anywhere  except  in  the  kitchen,  but  he  avenged 
himself  by  being  despotic  elsewhere,  and  he  would  not  hear 
of  a  lady  being  on  the  platform  at  the  meeting  at  the 
Assembly  Rooms.  So  my  wife  had  to  creep  up  a  narrow 
staircase  to  a  gallery  from  which  she  could  study  the  back 
of  my  head  while  I  made  what  she  thought  was  a  very  long 
and  a  very  dull  speech.  A  taste  for  listening  to  political 
oratory  needs  to  be  acquired.  In  later  years  she  was  fond 
of  hearing  me  speak,  but  at  this  time  I  think  she  envied 
my  chairman  his  capacity  for  indulging  himself  with  a  little 
gentle  sleep  at  the  dull  passages. 

The  sitting  of  the  Courts  brought  us  back  to  London,  and 
for  a  time  we  stayed  chiefly  at  Belgrave  Mansions. 

Before  the  end  of  the  year  my  mother's  long  illness 
ended  in  her  death,  and  we  at  once  began  to  consider  the 
question  of  taking  a  more  convenient  London  house.  We 
discussed  Kensington,  and  the  pleasant  district  north  of 
Hyde  Park,  and  went  to  look  at  houses  in  Onslow  Square 
and  Elm  Park  Gardens.  But  I  had  set  my  mind  on  a 
good  library,  and  in  the  houses  we  looked  at  the  third 
sitting-room  was  generally  small  and  dark. 

One  day  I  said,  "  I  wish  we  could  find  a  house  like  one 
of  those  fine  ones  in  Russell  Square." 

"  Why  not  live  in  Russell  Square  ?  "  said  my  wife.  "  I 
should  not  object  to  it  at  all." 

Much  rejoiced  I  went  to  Coade,  the  house  agent,  and 
learned  that  number  37,  at  the  north-east  corner  of  Montagu 
Place,  had  been  put  into  his  hands  for  private  sale.  It 
was  a  fine  spacious  house  built  in  1801  for  Sir  James  Park 
(though  never  occupied  by  him).  There  were  six  reception- 
rooms  ;  the  large  drawing-room  and  the  principal  bedroom 
were  each  thirty  feet  long  by  twenty  wide,  and  there  was  a 
delightful  first  floor  room  looking  on  to  Montagu  Place,  thirty- 
one  feet  by  nineteen,  which  was  the  ideal  library  I  desired. 
14 


198  CHIEFLY  DOMESTIC  [CHAP,  xvm 

The  lease  had  seventeen  years  to  run,  and  included  a  stable 
near  at  hand ;  the  ground-rent  was  only  £50  a  year,  which 
was  the  rent  at  which  the  stable  was  underlet. 

I  bought  the  residue  of  the  lease  for  £1,700,  and  I  count 
it  one  of  the  chief  of  the  many  pieces  of  good  fortune  that 
these  pages  record  that  for  almost  the  whole  of  the  busy 
period  when  my  working  life  was  spent  in  the  Royal  Courts 
in  Fleet  Street  and  the  Houses  of  Parliament  I  occupied  a 
delightful  house  so  convenient  for  both. 

We  breakfasted  every  morning  at  9  o'clock,  and  then, 
independent  of  omnibus  or  train,  I  found  useful  exercise  in 
the  twenty  minutes'  walk  which  took  me  down  to  the  Temple. 
When  the  Courts  rose  I  walked  along  the  Embankment  to 
the  House  of  Commons,  and  thence  at  the  cry  "  Who  goes 
home  ?  "  I  walked  up  Whitehall,  through  Trafalgar  Square, 
and  past  the  Seven  Dials,  to  my  home,  and  so  got  the  four 
miles  a  day  of  walking  exercise  which  I  have  found  desirable 
for  health. 

That  walk  home  at  night  was  a  strange  one.  When  the 
House  sat  late  I  should  see  the  disappointed  dealers  in 
Goblin  Market  nodding  their  good-bye  to  friendly  policemen, 
and  bargaining  with  cabmen  to  drive  them  home.  In 
Trafalgar  Square  when  the  nights  were  warm  one  saw  the 
homeless  outcasts  lying  out  upon  the  stone.  At  the  Seven 
Dials,  where  the  police  walked  in  couples,  I  used  to  walk  in 
the  road  or  at  the  pavement  edge  on  the  alert,  and  out  of 
reach  of  the  strange  forms  that  sometimes  lurked  in  door- 
ways. I  was  not  troubled  by  fear,  and  was  never  molested  ; 
but  I  have  seen  the  men  on  fixed  point  duty  tighten  their 
belts  and  start  off  at  a  run  at  the  sound  of  a  woman's 
scream  ;  and  one  night  there  were  curses  and  shrieks  for 
mercy  from  an  upper  room,  and  a  woman  crying  "  Murder  " 
managed  to  throw  the  street  door-key  down  to  the  police, 
who  rushed  in  to  her  help,  while  the  night  wanderers  crept 
and  sidled  into  the  street,  and  I  quickened  my  homeward 
steps. 

My  wife  and  I  made  our  new  home  very  comfortable. 
The  library  was  fitted  with  low  bookshelves  on  the  top  of 


1880-94]  I   GIVE  UP  SMOKING  199 

which  fine  bronzes  and  choice  bits  of  Martinware  soon  found 
their  place.  It  fortunately  happened  that  a  well-known 
furniture  dealer  in  Holborn  sold  off  his  stock  just  after  we 
took  possession  of  our  house,  and  I  spent  £2,000  at  the 
sale,  on  tables,  and  cabinets,  and  china.  And  I  began 
to  buy  fine  engravings,  and  the  books  for  which  hitherto 
I  had  had  no  room. 

This  story  of  my  life  would  not  be  complete  if  I  omitted 
a  fortunate  incident  which  happened  about  this  date,  the 
suggestion  by  my  friend  Sir  William  Jenner  that  I  should 
give  up  the  habit  of  smoking.  I  had  learned  to  smoke 
when  I  was  thirteen  years  old  at  a  wretched  boarding  school 
at  Calais,  from  which  I  was  brought  back  in  a  very  few 
weeks  to  my  better  surroundings  at  George  Yard.  From 
the  time  I  was  eighteen  I  was  a  constant  smoker,  and  when 
I  came  to  the  hard  work  of  a  leader  much  engaged  in  Court  I 
found  the  evil  of  the  habit.  I  was  indeed  quite  moderate  in 
its  indulgence.  But  it  is  impossible  for  the  habitual  smoker 
to  avoid  occasional  excess.  A  long  public  dinner ;  the  in- 
teresting talk  in  the  smoking-room  after  a  political  meeting ; 
the  evening  spent  in  the  smoking-room  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons to  escape  the  terrors  of  a  Scotch  debate, — all  these 
were  occasions  of  excess  which  sent  me  into  Court  the  next 
morning  with  less  clearness  of  brain  and  less  steadiness  of 
nerve  than  I  should  have  had.  But  this  was  not  very 
frequent,  and  I  think  I  should  have  continued  the  habit 
had  not  Sir  William  Jenner  said  to  me  one  day,  "  You 
should  not  smoke  so  much." 

"  Do  you  mean,"  said  I,  "  that  I  ought  to  give  up  smoking 
altogether  ?  " 

"  Well,"  he  said,  "  if  you  could  give  it  up  it  would  be  a 
good  thing  for  you." 

I  told  him  that  I  should  be  ashamed  of  myself  if  I  had  a 
habit  I  could  not  give  up  at  five  minutes'  notice  ;  and  since 
that  conversation  I  have  never  smoked.  For  a  few  weeks 
I  suffered  severely,  but  at  the  end  of  a  couple  of  months 
the  desire  had  entirely  passed  away,  and  I  have  never  felt 
the  least  inclination  to  resume  the  habit. 


2o6  CHIEFLY  DOMESTIC  [CHAP,  xvm 

The  gain  was  great  and  immediate.  I  had  no  more  dull 
and  ineffective  mornings.  I  always  had  the  feeling  that 
the  mental  and  physical  machine  was  working  steadily 
and  up  to  its  normal  power,  and  the  comfort  of  that  feeling 
can  hardly  be  overstated.  It  was  a  fortunate  day  for  me 
when  I  freed  myself  from  the  expensive  and  mischievous 
habit. 

I  do  not  propose  to  attempt  any  detailed  narrative  of 
my  domestic  life  during  the  years  of  my  active  work  in 
Parliament.  It  was  a  happy  life  and  not  very  eventful. 
A  son  was  born  to  us  in  1883,  and  a  couple  of  years  later 
another  came,  somewhat  prematurely,  and  lived  only  a  few 
hours.  My  boy  and  girl  were  both  delicate,  and  our  fear 
lest  they  should  have  inherited  their  mother's  ailment  made 
us  very  anxious,  but  two  years  at  an  excellent  boarding 
school  at  Hastings  did  for  the  boy  just  what  my  own  stay 
at  Edmonton  had  done  for  me  thirty-five  years  before,  and 
my  daughter  gained  the  same  benefit  from  a  longer  stay 
at  a  very  good  school  at  Folkestone.  My  income  went  on 
increasing ;  we  had  a  delightful  house  and  ample  means, 
and  the  only  drawback  to  our  happiness  was  that  my  dear 
wife's  health,  which  had  never  been  very  strong,  failed 
sadly  after  the  birth  of  our  second  child,  and  during  ten 
years  of  our  stay  at  Russell  Square  prevented  her  full 
enjoyment  of  the  society  pleasures  which  at  Court  and  at 
the  great  houses  of  the  West  End  were  now  very  freely 
offered  to  us. 

We  were  always  very  fond  of  boating,  and  in  1884  I  took 
a  house  for  some  weeks  of  the  autumn  on  the  river  bank  at 
Hampton.  The  following  year  we  were  at  Sunbury ;  and 
in  1886  I  rented  the  Vicarage  at  Staines.  We  found  the 
river  there  so  delightful  that  for  the  next  three  years  we 
spent  some  weeks  at  a  house  a  little  below  the  bridge, 
and  as  wealth  increased  I  began  to  think  of  buying  a  country 
house,  and  was  much  tempted  by  a  beautifully  situated 
house  at  Priest  Hill  which  my  old  friend  Virgo  Buckland 
had  built,  but  had  not  lived  to  occupy.  But  it  was  rather 
inconvenient  for  the  railway,  and  again  I  had  a  great  piece 


i88o-94]  THORNCOTE  201 

of  good  fortune.  While  Priest  Hill  was  still  under  discussion 
I  saw  an  advertisement  of  the  sale  by  auction  of  Thorncote, 
a  house  which  stood  in  large  grounds  and  could  hardly  be 
seen  from  the  river,  but  about  which  I  had  always  had 
some  curiosity.  The  auction  never  took  place.  My  wife 
and  I  went  down  one  Saturday  afternoon,  and  fell  in  love 
with  the  place,  and  by  the  following  Wednesday  the  pur- 
chase was  completed,  and  I  found  myself  the  possessor  of 
the  most  delightful  home  that  could  be  imagined.  About 
twenty  years  earlier  a  man  who  expected  that  at  an  old 
aunt's  death  he  would  inherit  her  large  fortune,  bought  the 
land,  and  spent  upon  the  building  of  the  house  more  than  the 
£6,500  which  I  gave  for  the  whole  property.  The  aunt 
died  and  had  left  her  money  to  somebody  else,  so  he  could  not 
afford  to  live  there,  and  the  place  was  empty  for  some  years. 
Then  Dr.  Yeo  of  King's  College,  London,  bought  it  and 
lived  there  until  after  his  wife's  death  he  sold  it  to  me. 

There  were  eight  acres  of  pleasant  grounds,  on  the 
preferable  side  of  the  river,  the  towpath  side  ;  a  convenient 
and  roomy  house  ;  a  fine  walled  garden,  tennis  and  croquet 
lawns,  good  stabling  and  cowhouses,  a  private  landing-stage, 
and  a  capital  boat-house  in  which  the  boats  were  stored 
in  winter,  and  which  made  a  very  pleasant  lounge  in  the 
summer.  Soon  after  I  took  possession  I  had  the  oppor- 
tunity of  buying  a  strip  of  frontage  on  the  opposite  bank, 
and  this  completely  secured  our  privacy. 

For  very  nearly  twenty  years  this  was  our  pleasant 
country  home,  and  we  thoroughly  enjoyed  it.  The  children 
grew  up  there.  My  eldest  boy  passed  from  Hastings  to 
the  famous  Dr.  Tabor's  School  at  Cheam,  and  then  to  Eton, 
where  he  was  a  wet-bob,  and  one  year  coxed  Macnaghten's 
boat  on  the  Fourth  of  June.  Then  he  went  to  Trinity 
Hall.  He  revived  the  Staines  Regatta,  which  had  formerly 
been  a  great  rowing  function,  but  had  been  allowed  to  drop, 
and  as  secretary  restored  it  to  great  success.  For  several 
years  a  Trinity  Hall  crew  rowed  in  the  fours  and  pairs.  We 
put  them  up  at  Thorncote,  with  Trevor  Jones  their  coach, 
and  there  was  high  festival  in  house  and  gardens  when 


202  CHIEFLY  DOMESTIC  [CHAP,  xvm 

they  brought  back  their  prizes,  and  their  days  of  qualified 
abstinence  were  over.  Fernie,  Steele,  Dixon,  Croft,  the 
Guinesses,  Looney  Bullard — what  dear  good  fellows  they 
were  ! — how  pleasant  it  is  twenty  years  later  to  remember 
those  happy  days ! 

The  boating  was  very  useful  to  me.  Every  year  my  dear 
old  friend  George  Ryan,  of  the  London  Rowing  Club,  who 
rowed  eight  years  at  Henley,  one  of  the  finest  oars  ever  seen 
there,  and  one  of  the  kindest,  most  generous  and  unselfish 
men  I  ever  knew,  used  to  come  and  spend  some  weeks 
with  us.  When  I  could  get  the  whole  day  we  sculled  together 
down  to  Sunbury  or  up  to  Surley  Hall,  or  if  I  could  not  get 
down  from  town  until  the  afternoon  we  would  go  to  Chertsey 
or  up  as  far  as  the  Angler's  Rest  for  a  little  exercise.  And 
my  son  would  be  there  to  take  the  sculls  if  his  father  was 
tired.  Or  if  I  preferred  to  be  lazy  my  wife  and  daughter, 
who  were  both  expert  with  the  punt  pole,  would  take  me  on 
the  river,  which  for  four  days  in  the  week  was  so  quiet  that 
one  would  hardly  think  it  a  public  highway. 

I  am  speaking  of  my  pleasures  at  Staines,  so  it  would  be 
affectation  to  omit  one  of  the  greatest.  That  was  the  build- 
ing of  St.  Peter's  Church.  When  I  bought  Thorncote,  the 
only  place  of  Church  of  England  worship  within  a  mile  of 
the  house  was  a  very  uncomfortable  iron  building,  too  hot 
in  summer  and  much  too  cold  in  winter,  in  the  Edgell  Road. 
Some  one  suggested  that  a  church  should  be  built,  and  a 
subscription  list  was  opened.  Two  or  three  sums  of  £500 
each  were  promised,  but  after  that  only  small  amounts  were 
talked  of,  and  it  was  clear  there  would  be  much  difficulty 
in  raising  the  required  sum.  A  little  higher  up  the  river 
than  Thorncote  there  was  a  charming  site,  where  a  row  of 
fine  elms  stood  along  the  river-side  of  a  field  which  it  was 
proposed  to  let  in  building  plots.  I  was  afraid  these  trees 
would  be  cut  down,  so  I  told  my  neighbours  that  if  they 
would  buy  the  site  I  would  build  a  church  upon  it.  The 
site  was  secured,  and  I  employed  Mr.  George  Fellowes  Prynne, 
the  son  of  my  dear  old  friend  and  supporter  at  Plymouth, 
the  famous  Vicar  of  St.  Peter's  there,  to  design  the  church 


1880-94]  ST.   PETER'S  CHURCH  203 

and  superintend  its  construction,  Dr.  Temple,  then  Bishop 
of  London,  came  down  to  the  laying  of  the  foundation-stone 
by  my  wife  on  July  22nd,  1893,  and  the  church  was  conse- 
crated a  year  later.  It  has  been  a  great  happiness  to  me 
and  mine. 

It  is  said,  I  believe  truly,  to  be  a  beautiful  church. 
Except  for  a  necessary,  but  not  very  rigid,  limitation  of 
cost,  the  architect  had  practically  a  free  hand.  He  was 
working  under  a  committee  of  one,  who  did  not  interfere. 
I  state  the  cost,  because  I  have  seen  exaggerated  statements 
as  to  this,  and  I  should  like  to  encourage  others  to  give 
themselves  the  same  privilege  which  I  have  enjoyed. 

The  structure  cost  £8,000,  of  which  the  foundations  in  a 
gravel  soil  near  the  river  bank  accounted  for  £1,400  ;  the 
heating,  lighting,  and  choir  furniture  and  seating  and  archi- 
tect's fees  came  to  £917.  The  organ  built  by  Hele  of  Ply- 
mouth cost  £1,000  ;  the  peal  of  eight  bells  £545  ;  and  the 
stained  glass  windows,  designed  by  the  architect's  brother, 
Mr.  Edward  Prynne,  which  have  been  added  from  time  to 
time,  and  which  are,  I  think,  as  beautiful  as  any  modern  glass 
I  have  ever  seen,  represent  another  £1,850  ;  making  a  total 
of  less  than£i2,50o.  I  have  never  spent  money  which  brought 
back  so  rich  a  reward  to  myself.  For  twenty-three  years 
I  have  worshipped  God  in  this  church,  which  He  gave  me 
the  means  and  the  will  to  erect  to  His  service.  For  fourteen 
years  I  have  been  one  of  the  churchwardens  and  have  read 
the  lessons  at  the  Sunday  services.  I  hope  my  experience 
may  lead  men  whom  God  has  entrusted  with  wealth  to 
make  a  thank-offering  in  this  way.  They  may  not  often 
have  the  opportunity  which  was  given  to  me  of  building  a 
church  close  to  my  own  home  and  enjoying  its  services 
myself,  but  wherever  they  build  one  they  will  find  great 
happiness  in  thinking  of  its  existence  and  its  usefulness, 


CHAPTER   XIX 

POLITICS    IN    THE    HOUSE    OF    COMMONS    AND    ELSEWHERE  : 

1882-1884 

THE  motion  for  carrying  on  Bills  from  one  session  to 
another  was  not  my  only  attempt  to  be  of  use  in  parliamen- 
tary work  in  1882.  In  the  previous  autumn  the  Associated 
Chambers  of  Commerce  had  held  a  very  successful  meeting 
at  Plymouth.  At  that  meeting  it  was  decided  to  introduce 
a  Bankruptcy  Bill,  and  after  carefully  going  over  the  draft 
Bill  with  Mr.  Barran,  the  Member  for  Leeds,  I  added  my 
name  as  one  of  the  proposers.  Mine  was  the  only  Conserva- 
tive name ;  the  other  three  were  Mr.  Norwood  of  Hull, 
Mr.  Monk  of  Gloucester,  and  Mr.  Barran.  It  was,  I  believe, 
a  very  good  Bill.  It  represented  the  considered  experience 
and  opinion  of  the  Associated  Chambers  of  Commerce,  and 
my  three  colleagues  were  all  men  of  large  commercial 
experience.  Its  history  was  a  curious  one.  No  member 
on  either  side  put  down  his  name  to  oppose  the  second 
reading,  so  one  night,  rather  late,  the  Bill  came  on.  But 
Mr.  Chamberlain,  then  President  of  the  Board  of  Trade, 
moved  that  the  debate  be  adjourned.  We  divided  against 
the  Government,  and  although  all  the  Members  of  the 
Government  in  attendance  voted  for  Mr.  Chamberlain's 
motion,  fourteen  Liberals  voted  against  them,  and  we  had 
a  majority.  Upon  that  Mr.  Chamberlain  put  down  a 
blocking  motion  to  prevent  the  Bill  going  into  Committee, 
and  told  Mr.  Barran  he  would  only  take  the  block  off  if  he 
received  a  promise  that  the  Bill  should  not  be  proceeded 
with  until  the  Bankruptcy  Bill  he  himself  was  going  to 
introduce  should  be  before  the  House  of  Commons.  Mr. 
Barran  gave  the  promise,  and  no  Government  Bill  was 

204 


1882-4]  AN  OPPORTUNITY   MISSED  205 

introduced  that  session.  Indeed  the  year  was  strangely 
unproductive  of  domestic  legislation,  considering  that  it 
was  the  third  session  of  a  Parliament  with  regard  to  whose 
legislative  activities  great  promises  had  been  made.  There 
was  but  one  measure  of  considerable  importance  passed  with 
reference  to  the  interests  of  England,  and  that  was  a  measure 
of  much  usefulness  dealing  with  the  difficult  subject  of 
settled  lands,  and  for  that  the  country  was  indebted  not 
to  the  Government  but  to  the  ex-Lord  Chancellor,  Lord 
Cairns.  I  think  almost  the  only  measure  which  the  Govern- 
ment could  claim  to  have  originated  and  passed  was  an 
Act  to  allow  the  Post  Office  to  issue  reply-postcards. 

That  autumn  we  had  a  curious  instance  of  our  leader's 
want  of  alertness. 

On  October  24th,  1882,  Mr.  Gladstone  gave  notice  that 
on  the  following  Thursday  he  would  move  a  vote  of  thanks 
to  the  commanders,  officers,  and  men  of  Her  Majesty's  Forces 
in  Egypt.  When  the  terms  of  the  motion  were  published 
on  the  Thursday  morning  I  noticed  they  contained  words 
which  described  the  operations  which  had  taken  place  in 
Egypt  as  "  the  suppression  of  the  military  rebellion  against 
the  authority  of  His  Highness  the  Khedive." 

These  were  very  disputable  words,  as  they  carried  with 
them  an  indorsement  of  the  policy  of  the  Government  which 
the  Opposition  and  a  great  many  of  the  Radicals  were  not 
willing  to  give.  I  saw  Henry  de  Worms,  and  together  we 
looked  at  the  precedents,  and  found  that  in  1840, 1858, 1879, 
and  in  1881  the  neutral  expression  "  military  operations  " 
had  been  used.  I  tried  to  see  Sir  Stafford  Northcote,  and, 
failing  in  that,  wrote  to  him  suggesting  that  if  an  amend- 
ment were  proposed  substituting  the  accustomed  words  the 
Government  must  give  way,  that  then  there  would  be  an 
unanimous  vote  and  at  the  same  time  a  distinct  party 
success.  He  sent  back  word  that  he  thought  the  suggestion 
a  good  one ;  that  he  should  net  move  an  amendment  him- 
self, but  would  be  glad  if  the  point  were  raised.  So  we  went 
down  to  the  House  looking  forward  to  a  useful  evening. 
Mr.  Gladstone  made  a  brilliant  speech,  and  Sir  Stafford 


206    POLITICS  IN  THE  HOUSE  OF  COMMONS  [CHAP,  xix 

Northcote  sat  as  usual  as  if  mesmerised.  He  sat  as  Cecil 
Raikes  had  described  him,  "  with  the  hands  of  perplexity 
travelling  up  and  down  the  sleeves  of  irresolution." 

Then  he  got  up  and  in  his  very  first  sentence  expressed 
his  hope  that  the  graceful  act  which  the  House  was  asked 
to  perform  would  not  be  marred  by  any  want  of  unanimity. 
There  were  two  divisions  with  seventeen  and  twenty-five 
Irishmen  in  the  "  No  "  Lobby ;  and  the  most  fortunate 
opportunity  was  absolutely  thrown  away. 

The  following  year  the  labours  of  the  Government  were 
much  more  fruitful.  With  constant  assistance  from  the 
Conservative  side  of  the  House  they  passed  a  good  Bank- 
ruptcy Bill,  a  Patents  Bill,  and  a  very  valuable  Corrupt 
Practices  Bill.  The  last  named  of  these  measures  had  the 
advantage  of  being  in  the  hands  of  an  Attorney-General  who 
was  deservedly  in  favour  with  all  political  parties.  Sir 
Henry  James  was  a  man  of  great  ability  and  of  high  character, 
and  did  honour  to  himself  and  his  profession  when  four 
years  later  he  refused  its  greatest  prize,  the  Lord  Chancellor- 
ship of  England,  rather  than  assist  in  setting  up  a  Home  Rule 
Government  in  Ireland.  As  an  advocate  he  was  skilful  but 
not  very  courageous,  and  for  fear  of  losing  a  case  he  often 
settled  it  when  with  a  little  more  energy  and  persistence  he 
might  have  won.  But  his  handsome  person,  his  suave  and 
dignified  eloquence,  and  his  genial  manners,  made  him  a 
personal  favourite  in  the  Courts  and  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons ;  and  this  greatly  helped  him  in  the  difficult  task  of 
piloting  the  Corrupt  Practices  Bill  through  Committee. 

He  was  assisted  by  the  indignation  felt  by  honest  men 
of  all  parties  at  the  flagrant  and  widespread  corruption  on 
both  sides  which  was  known  to  have  influenced  the  elections 
of  1880.  Of  the  extent  of  this  corruption  the  election 
petitions  which  were  tried  gave  only  imperfect  evidence.  In 
some  of  the  worst  cases  the  defeated  party  did  not  dare 
to  petition  because  of  their  own  misdeeds.  In  others  they 
were  afraid  to  do  so  although  their  own  hands  were  clean 
from  bribery  at  this  election  ;  they  knew  that  any  investi- 
gation into  the  electoral  history  of  the  borough  would  result 


1882-4]  CORRUPT  PRACTICES  207 

in  its  disfranchisement  because  of  the  corruption  which  had 
taken  place  in  past  times.  And  sometimes  when  petitions 
had  been  presented  there  were  negotiations  between  the 
Party  Whips,  and  a  petition  which  threatened  a  Liberal 
seat  was  quietly  withdrawn  and  the  attack  on  a  Conserva- 
tive seat  elsewhere  was  at  the  same  time  abandoned.  Again 
where  a  petition  actually  came  on  for  trial,  directly  it  became 
clear  the  seat  could  not  be  defended  the  attempt  was 
abandoned,  and  it  became  the  object  of  both  parties  to 
conceal  from  the  judges  the  real  extent  of  the  corruption. 
At  the  meeting  of  my  constituents  at  the  Plymouth 
Guildhall  in  January  1883,  speaking  of  Sir  Henry  James* 
Bill  which  had  been  introduced  in  the  session  of  1882,  but 
not  then  proceeded  with,  and  was  now  about  to  be  reintro- 
duced  and  pressed  forward,  I  said  I  should  propose  three 
amendments,  two  of  which  were  intended  to  meet  the  evils 
I  have  just  stated.  I  prepared  a  set  of  eight  clauses  which 
provided  that  if  after  a  parliamentary  election  a  certain 
number  of  electors  were  to  present  a  petition  alleging  that 
there  had  been  corrupt  practices,  a  Commissioner  should  be 
sent  down  to  inquire  into  the  facts  with  power  to  summon 
witnesses  and  call  for  documents.  This  proposal  had  in 
substance  been  proposed  by  Mr.  Disraeli  many  years  before. 
When  the  Bill  was  in  Committee  my  motion  to  insert  these 
clauses  was  seconded  by  my  dear  friend  Robert  Reid  (since 
then  Attorney-General  and  Lord  Chancellor,  Earl  Lore- 
burn),  an  able  lawyer,  and  a  politician  of  independent  thought 
and  unflinching  courage  ;  one  of  the  most  high-minded, 
generous,  and  unselfish  of  men.  It  seems  strange  to  me  to 
call  him  Robert ;  he  was  affectionately  known  as  "  Bob 
Reid  "  by  all  his  brethren  of  the  Bar.  The  clauses  were 
not  accepted  by  the  Government.  They  did  not,  of  course, 
come  up  for  discussion  until  the  entire  Bill  as  proposed  by 
the  Government  had  been  considered,  and  it  would  have 
been  unreasonable  and  useless  to  press  them.  The  pro- 
visions of  this  valuable  measure,  and  the  great  enlargement 
of  the  constituencies  which  has  since  taken  place,  have  done 
much  to  remedy  the  evils  they  were  intended  to  meet. 


2o8    POLITICS  IN  THE  HOUSE  OF  COMMONS  [CHAP,  xix 

I  was  more  fortunate  in  the  other  two  important  amend- 
ments which  I  proposed,  and  which  were  accepted,  one  in 
full  and  the  other  in  part,  by  the  Attorney-General.  One 
was  my  proposal  that  from  the  time  the  Corrupt  Practices 
Act  became  law  no  investigation  on  any  election  petition 
should  go  back  to  anything  before  that  date.  I  had 
said  to  my  constituents, 

We  know  of  boroughs  in  this  country  where  there  are, 
on  both  sides  of  political  parties,  earnest  and  resolute  men, 
determined,  as  far  as  may  be,  to  make  elections  pure, 
but  who  yet  are  fettered  by  the  difficulty  of  the  past 
history  of  their  borough.  Let  us  draw  a  line,  and  let  us 
start  a  fresh  system,  and  then  I  believe  we  shall  find  that 
this  difficulty  being  got  out  of  the  way,  some  of  those 
boroughs  whose  electoral  history  has  not  been  pure  will 
be  for  the  future  places  where  parliamentary  elections  will 
be  properly  and  purely  conducted. 

This  was  accepted,  and  my  forecast  has  been  fully 
justified. 

My  other  proposal  was  to  give  the  judges  an  equitable 
power  of  refusing  to  unseat  a  member  if  they  found  that 
the  corrupt  practice  proved  was  a  single  act,  entirely  con- 
trary to  his  instructions  and  efforts,  and  that  it  did  not  affect 
the  result  of  the  election.  I  was  thinking  of  my  own 
experience  at  Southwark,  where  my  political  career  might 
have  been  marred,  and  the  wishes  of  a  great  constituency 
defeated,  because  a  member  of  my  committee  in  the  excite- 
ment of  the  polling  day  had  given  a  silk  handkerchief  and 
half  a  crown  to  a  voter. 

Sir  Henry  James  accepted  the  clause  so  far  as  treating 
was  concerned,  but,  to  my  lasting  regret,  refused  to  allow 
the  equitable  relief  in  a  case  of  bribery. 

While  Sir  Henry  James  gained  strength  for  the  Govern- 
ment and  credit  for  himself  by  the  passing  of  this  measure, 
the  fate  of  Mr.  Chamberlain  was  very  different.  He  did 
indeed  pass  a  Bankruptcy  Bill  which  excited  little  con- 
troversy, and  was  only  of  political  interest  in  the  fact  that 
when  under  its  provisions  many  appointments  had  to  be; 


1882-4]  MERCHANT  SHIPPING  209 

made  to  the  comfortable  and  profitable  post  of  Official 
Receiver,  most  of  these  appointments  were  bestowed  on 
solicitors  who  had  been  election  agents  on  the  Liberal  side 
or  otherwise  useful  to  that  party.  But  another  subject 
had  come  to  the  front  with  which  as  President  of  the  Board 
of  Trade  it  was  his  business  to  deal.  People  were  not  greatly 
interested  in  law  reform,  but  the  public  mind  had  been 
much  excited  by  the  frequence  of  the  loss  at  sea  of  our 
merchant  ships.  That  the  laws  relating  to  Merchant  Ship- 
ping required  amendment  was  quite  clear. 

In  the  year  1876  the  Conservative  Government  had 
brought  forward  a  Bill  for  the  amendment  of  the  law 
relating  to  Maritime  Contracts,  which  was  prevented  from 
passing  in  great  measure  through  the  success  of  certain 
efforts  at  obstruction  in  which  Mr.  Chamberlain,  who  had 
entered  the  House  of  Commons  two  years  before,  took  an 
active  part. 

But  in  1883  Mr.  Chamberlain  determined  to  try  his  hand 
at  a  measure.  He  began  by  making  a  strange  but  char- 
acteristic mistake.  In  November  1883  he  issued  a  circular 
from  the  Board  of  Trade  which  was  a  wanton  and  unjust 
attack  upon  the  body  of  shipowners  of  this  country.  It 
stated  that  the  loss  of  life  had  been  increasing ;  and  it  said 
that  this  loss  of  life  arose  in  a  great  degree  from  prevent- 
able causes  with  which  the  Bill  to  be  proposed  would  have 
to  deal.  It  was  not  a  fact  that  the  loss  of  life  had  been 
increasing.  The  year  1881-2  was  a  year  during  which  there 
was  a  terrible  loss  of  life,  especially  among  fishermen.  Very 
nearly  600  fishermen  lost  their  lives  in  the  gales  of  1881, 
and  that  number  raised  very  largely  the  average  of  the  loss 
upon  merchant  shipping  services.  Even  raised  by  that 
loss  of  fishing-boats  the  loss  during  that  year  was  less  than 
the  average  of  the  years  before  ;  and  although  this  dis- 
astrous loss  of  life  in  fishing-boats  was  brought  in  to  swell 
the  statistics  to  be  used  in  support  of  legislation,  the  Bill 
was  to  have  no  application  to  fishing-boats. 

But  between  November  1883  and  February  1884  no 
opportunity  was  lost  of  exciting  the  public  mind  against 


210    POLITICS  IN  THE  HOUSE  OF  COMMONS  [CHAP,  xix 

the  shipowners,  who  were  denounced  in  the  speeches  of  the 
President  of  the  Board  of  Trade  as  men  who  were  in  the 
pursuit  of  unholy  gains ;  and  then  on  February  6th  the  Bill 
was  introduced  and  read  a  first  time.  It  was  full  of  serious 
difficulties.  It  provided  that  any  person  who  was  interested 
in  the  insurance  of  a  vessel  should  have  the  right  of  opening 
the  question  whether  that  vessel  was  over-insured  or  not 
when  the  insurance  was  claimed,  but  curiously  enough  it 
left  out  all  reference  to  the  insurance  of  cargo,  although 
there  was  reason  for  believing  that  the  loss  of  life  happening 
either  intentionally  or  through  wanton  carelessness  hap- 
pened more  often  from  the  over-insurance  of  cargo  than 
the  over-insurance  of  the  hull.  It  proposed  to  abolish  the 
law  of  limited  liability  in  the  case  of  companies  owning 
merchant-vessels,  making  all  the  members  of  the  company 
liable  if  any  loss  occurred  to  the  full  extent  of  their  fortunes. 
And  it  abolished  compulsory  pilotage  ;  which  seemed  an 
odd  way  of  saving  seamen's  lives. 

Three  months  passed  before  the  Bill  was  put  down  for 
second  reading.  During  that  time  negotiations  had  taken 
place  between  the  shipowners,  who  absolutely  refused  to  meet 
Mr.  Chamberlain,  and  Sir  Farrer  Herschell,  the  Solicitor- 
General,  who  was  called  in  to  represent  the  Board  of 
Trade.  In  these  discussions  the  Bill  was  pulled  all  to 
pieces.  The  section  abolishing  compulsory  pilotage  was 
given  up.  The  section  abolishing  limited  liability  was  given 
up.  The  Bill  was  brought  back  to  such  a  form  that  it  was 
not  so  good  a  Bill  for  the  benefit  of  the  seamen  as  the  Con- 
servative Maritime  Contracts  Bill  of  1876  would  have  been. 

On  May  I7th  Mr.  Chamberlain  moved  the  second  reading 
of  his  attenuated  Bill.  He  made  an  extraordinary  speech. 
It  began  between  6  and  7  o'clock  and  lasted  within  a  few 
minutes  of  four  hours,  and  there  were  hardly  twenty  sen- 
tences of  it  which  were  directly  relevant  to  the  proposals  he 
was  putting  forward. 

I  stayed  there  listening  to  the  whole  speech  and  taking 
notes  of  it,  but  of  course  there  was  no  time  for  debate  that 
night,  and  after  one  or  two  short  speeches  I  moved  the 


1882-4]          GLADSTONE  AND   CHAMBERLAIN  211 

adjournment  of  the  debate.  Week  after  week  went  by  and 
the  Bill  was  not  again  heard  of.  At  last,  about  June  2oth,  I 
asked  Mr.  Gladstone  when  the  Merchant  Shipping  Bill  would 
be  put  down  again  for  discussion.  His  answer  was  that  he 
had  received  no  communication  from  the  right  honourable 
gentleman  in  charge  of  the  Bill  which  led  him  to  think  it 
desirable  to  fix  the  date  for  the  resumed  debate.  The  Bill 
was  never  again  put  down  for  second  reading.  It  was  put 
down  on  July  Qth,  but  only  for  the  purpose  of  being  with- 
drawn. 

I  do  not  know  the  explanation  of  these  strange  proceed- 
ings. It  may  be  that  Mr.  Gladstone,  seeing  the  unfortunate 
position  into  which  matters  had  drifted,  interfered  and 
compelled  the  abandonment  of  the  Bill.  It  may  be  that 
Mr.  Chamberlain  himself,  hurt  by  being  excluded  from  the 
negotiations  on  his  own  measure,  resolved  in  May  to  carry 
it  no  further,  and  took  the  opportunity  of  making  a  long 
speech  to  which  no  reply  would  be  possible.  But  in  any  case 
the  incident  was  a  severe  blow  to  his  parliamentary  posi- 
tion, and  did  not  tend  to  improve  the  relations  between  him 
and  the  Prime  Minister.  They  were  never  cordial  and 
never  could  be.  In  1880  Mr.  Chamberlain  and  Sir  Charles 
Dilke  were  admitted  to  office  with  great  reluctance  on  the 
part  of  the  Queen,  and  with  hesitation  and  dislike  on  the 
part  of  Mr.  Gladstone.  The  Queen  could  not  forget  that 
Sir  Charles  had  made  in  1872  a  frankly  Republican  speech, 
and  Mr.  Gladstone  could  not  easily  forgive  the  man  who 
had  publicly  declared  that  his  election  manifesto  of  1874 
was  "  the  meanest  public  document  that  had  ever  in  like 
circumstances  proceeded  from  the  pen  of  a  statesman  of 
the  first  rank."  l 

To  me  the  most  interesting  figures  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons during  that  Parliament  were  Mr.  Chamberlain  and 
Lord  Randolph  Churchill.  Each  looked  forward  to  be- 
coming the  leader  of  his  party  in  the  House  of  Commons ; 
the  one  by  succeeding  Mr.  Gladstone,  the  other  by  supplant- 
ing Sir  Stafford  Northcote.  Each  knew  himself  to  possess 

i  Article  by  Mr.  Chamberlain  in  Fortnightly  Review,  October  1874. 


212    POLITICS  IN  THE  HOUSE  OF  COMMONS  [CHAP,  xix 

qualities  which  justified  the  ambition.  Joseph  Chamberlain 
was  one  of  the  most  remarkable  men  the  middle  class  of 
English  society  ever  produced.  When  at  the  age  of  forty- 
three  he  entered  the  Cabinet  he  had  only  been  four  years  in 
Parliament  and  had  had  no  official  training.  But  his  life 
had  been  spent  in  useful  public  work  at  Birmingham ;  and 
the  position  which  there  he  had  deserved  and  obtained 
gave  him  an  unassailable  seat  in  the  House  of  Commons, 
and  the  unquestioned  leadership  of  the  advanced  Radical 
party.  He  had  an  attractive  personality.  In  face  he  was 
very  like  the  portraits  of  William  Pitt.  The  keen  eager  eyes 
and  thin  closely  compressed  lips  told  of  energy  and  firmness. 
His  voice  was  clear  and  strong,  his  words  well  chosen,  his 
gestures  free  but  not  extravagant. 

He  and  Sir  William  Harcourt  did  much  to  spoil  House 
of  Commons  speaking  by  their  too  constant  use  of  the 
tu-quoque  argument  and  their  abounding  quotation  from  old 
speeches  of  their  opponents.  The  greater  masters  of  debate, 
Disraeli,  Gladstone,  Balfour,  and  Asquith  have  very  rarely 
used  this  weapon.  But  when  a  capable  man  condescends 
to  employ  it  it  is  very  formidable.  For  thirty  years  Mr. 
Chamberlain  was  unquestionably  one  of  the  foremost 
debaters  in  the  House.  In  language  and  in  manner  he  was 
always  respectful  to  his  chief,  but  he  was  a  somewhat  trouble- 
some colleague.  Before  the  Government  was  a  year  old 
he  and  Mr.  Bright,  both  Cabinet  Ministers,  absented  them- 
selves from  an  important  division  on  our  policy  in  the 
Transvaal.  Almost  at  the  same  time,  when  disorder  in 
Ireland  was  rapidly  increasing,  they  successfully  opposed 
the  policy  of  Mr.  Gladstone,  who  wished  to  strengthen  the 
existing  law  but  to  retain  trial  by  jury,  and  they  insisted  on 
the  suspension  of  the  Habeas  Corpus  Act.  The  admission  of 
Sir  Charles  Dilke  to  the  Cabinet,  which  the  Prime  Minister 
practically  forced  upon  the  Queen  in  December  1882, 
strengthened  Mr.  Chamberlain's  position,  and  he  afterwards 
adopted  a  tone  of  independence  in  his  public  speeches  which 
Mr.  Gladstone  strongly  disapproved.  In  1883  he  made  a 
speech  at  Birmingham  which  gave  the  Prime  Minister  much 


1882-4]          LORD   RANDOLPH  CHURCHILL 

concern,  and  a  letter  of  remonstrance  had  little  effect; 
Speaking  of  the  Birmingham  speech  Mr.  Gladstone  wrote 
to  Sir  Henry  Ponsonby, 

I  consider  the  offence  does  not  consist  in  holding  certain 
opinions,  of  which  in  my  judgement  the  political  force  and 
effect  are  greatly  exaggerated,  but  in  the  attitude  assumed 
and  the  tone  and  colour  given  to  the  speech.1 

The  young  leader  was  treading  on  the  heels  of  the  old 
one  and  not  unwilling  to  trip  him  up,  but  not  yet  finding  the 
time  quite  ripe  for  his  own  supremacy. 

On  the  Conservative  side  there  was  something  of  the  same 
position,  and  in  the  domestic  controversies  of  the  party  I, 
who  had  been  a  member  of  the  Council  of  the  National 
Union  of  Conservative  Associations  ever  since  its  founda- 
tion in  1867,  t°°k  an  active  part. 

Lord  Randolph  Churchill  was  a  strange  creature,  and 
ill-equipped  for  the  great  task  which  he  set  himself  when 
he  resolved  to  become  the  leader  of  the  Tory  party. 
His  life  for  five  and  twenty  years  was  idle  and  frivolous. 
Then  the  Prince  of  Wales  quarrelled  with  Lord  Blandford, 
and  it  was  understood  that  the  Marquis  must  not  be  asked 
where  the  Prince  was  likely  to  be  present.  Lord  Randolph 
took  up  his  brother's  side  in  the  quarrel,  and  the  doors  of 
London  society  were  for  some  years  closed  against  him.  It 
fortunately  happened  that  his  father  became  Lord- Lieutenant 
in  Ireland,  and  four  years  spent  there  as  a  sort  of  unofficial 
private  secretary  gave  him  a  close  and  sympathetic  know- 
ledge of  the  Irish  people.  Then  the  rout  of  the  Conserva- 
tive party  and  the  fall  of  the  Ministry  in  1880  opened  to 
him  the  great  game  of  politics,  and  he  plunged  with  delight 
into  the  pleasures  of  a  free-handed  and  irresponsible 
opposition. 

He  had  little  knowledge  of  literature  and  none  of  science, 
no  familiarity  with  political  history,  and  very  slight 
acquaintance  with  foreign  affairs.  But  he  had,  when  in 
good  humour,  an  all-conquering  charm  of  manner.  His 

1  Morley's  Life  of  Gladstone,  ch.  iii,  p.  13. 
15 


POLITICS  IN  THE  HOUSE  OF  COMMONS  [CHAP,  xix 

talk,  like  his  speech,  sparkled  with  apt  and  incisive  phrases. 
He  could  be  the  most  delightful  of  companions.  But  his 
temper  was  fickle  as  April  and  stormy  as  October.  His  friend- 
ship and  his  emnity  were  always  in  extremes.  And  no  one 
could  guess  how  soon  he  would  pass  from  one  to  the  other. 
It  is  truly  said  in  Winston  Churchill's  brilliant  life  of  his 
father,  one  of  the  best  political  biographies  in  our  language, 
that— 

No  one  could  tell  what  he  would  do,  or  by  what  motive, 
lofty  or  trivial,  of  conviction  or  caprice,  of  irritation  or  self- 
sacrifice  he  would  be  governed.1 

In  1882,  by  the  casting  vote  of  Lord  Percy,  whom  he 
afterwards  treated  with  ungrateful  discourtesy,  Lord  Ran- 
dolph was  co-opted  as  a  member  of  the  Council  of  the 
National  Union,  and  it  soon  appeared  that  he  had  resolved 
to  try  to  obtain  for  himself  and  his  group  of  followers  the 
entire  control  of  all  the  activities  of  the  Union.  He  pro- 
posed to  get  rid  of  the  Central  Committee,  privately  ap- 
pointed by  the  leaders  of  the  party,  which  at  that  time 
dealt  with  the  selection  of  candidates  for  Parliament  and 
the  administration  of  party  funds.  These  matters,  as  well 
as  the  direction  and  declaration  of  the  party  policy,  were, 
according  to  his  scheme,  to  be  controlled  by  the  committee 
elected  at  the  annual  meeting  of  delegates  of  the  Conserva- 
tive Associations  which  were  affiliated  to  the  National 
Union.  To  me  and  to  most  of  those  who  had  like  myself 
worked  on  the  Council  for  fifteen  years  the  proposal  seemed 
mischievous  and  even  absurd.  A  conference  so  constituted 
and  meeting  only  once  a  year  was  quite  unfit  to  determine 
questions  of  policy,  while  a  committee  so  elected  could  not 
safely  be  entrusted  with  the  management  of  party  funds 
privately  contributed,  or  the  settlement  of  the  personal 
questions  which  arise  at  every  election  and  require  the  most 
delicate  and  confidential  treatment. 

At  the  Birmingham  Conference  in  October  1883  Lord 
Randolph,  carrying  out  an  arrangement  he  had  made  with 

1  Lord  Randolph  Churchill,  p.  129. 


1882-4]  THE  NATIONAL  UNION  215 

Gorst  and  Sir  Henry  Wolff,  declared  war  against  the  Central 
Committee,  and  advocated  the  placing  of  all  power  and 
finance  in  the  hands  of  the  Council  of  the  National  Union. 
His  speech  was  much  cheered,  and  there  was  the  appear- 
ance of  a  triumph  in  the  passing  without  a  division  of  a 
perfectly  innocuous  resolution  directing  the  Council  to  take 
steps  to  secure  for  the  National  Union  "  its  legitimate 
influence  in  the  party  organisation."  The  Conference  voted 
for  the  resolution,  not  the  speech,  and  there  was  no  reason 
for  any  one  to  vote  against  it.  But  when  it  came  to  the 
election  of  the  Council  the  conspirators  were  not  successful. 
Gorst,  writing  the  next  day,  described  Lord  Randolph  as 
carrying  all  before  him  by  a  capital  speech;  but  added  : 

The  election,  however,  went  off  badly.  Clarke,  Chaplin, 
Claud  Hamilton,  and  a  lot  of  other  undesirable  men  got 
elected,  and  it  will  require  the  greatest  care  and  skill  in 
the  selection  and  election  of  the  twelve  co-opted  members 
to  secure  us  the  necessary  working  majority.1 

This  working  majority  was  not  secured.  In  February 
Lord  Percy  resigned  the  Chairmanship  of  the  Council, 
Lord  Randolph  Churchill  and  Mr.  Henry  Chaplin  were 
proposed  for  the  office,  and  it  was  only  by  a  majority  of  2 
(17  to  15)  that  Lord  Randolph  was  elected.  Then  followed 
a  stormy  eight  months  of  Resolutions  and  Reports  and  Com- 
mittees and  Conferences,  with  four  very  important  divisions 
in  the  Council.  In  the  first  two  of  these  Lord  Randolph 
was  successful,  by  19  to  14,  and  17  to  13,  but  in  June  the 
balance  had  shifted.  Earl  Percy  moved  that  the  Annual 
Conference  should  be  held  at  Sheffield  and  as  soon  as 
possible.  Notwithstanding  a  violent  resistance  by  Lord 
Randolph  and  his  party,  this  was  carried  by  19  to  17.  A 
fortnight  later  an  attempt  was  made  to  postpone  the  Con- 
ference. Great  efforts  had  been  made  to  bring  up  voters 
to  support  this  proposal,  but  when  the  vote  was  taken  it 
was  rejected  by  19  to  18.  I  have  no  record  of  the  names 
of  those  voting  in  an  important  division  which  took  place 

1  The  Fourth  Party,  by  Harold  Gorst,  p.  258. 


2i6    POLITICS  IN  THE  HOUSE  OF  COMMONS  [CHAP,  xix 

in  May,  when  it  was  resolved  by  17  to  13,  in  spite  of  Lord 
Randolph's  opposition,  to  accept  a  suggestion  of  Mr.  Row- 
land Winn,  the  chief  Conservative  Whip,  that  a  few  of  the 
members  of  the  Council  should  be  deputed  to  confer  with 
the  Central  Committee.  Lord  Randolph  and  Gorst  refused 
to  serve  on  the  deputation,  and  Maclean,  the  mover,  Mr. 
Henry  Chaplin,  Lord  Claud  Hamilton,  Mr.  William  Houlds- 
worth,  and  I  had  an  interview  with  Mr.  Edward  Stanhope, 
Lord  Henniker,  Mr.  Arthur  Balfour,  and  Mr.  Whitley,  who 
then  constituted  the  Central  Committee. 

Upon  the  passing  of  this  motion  Lord  Randolph  in  a  fit 
of  temper  resigned  the  chairmanship  of  the  Council,  sent 
paragraphs  to  the  newspapers  foreshadowing  his  withdrawal 
from  political  life,  and  drafted  a  long  letter  to  his  chairman 
at  Birmingham  relinquishing  his  candidature  for  that 
borough.  The  letter  was  never  sent.  He  repented  of 
his  haste,  withdrew  his  resignation,  and  made  vigorous 
preparation  for  the  meeting  at  Sheffield.  Meanwhile  the 
negotiations  with  the  Central  Committee  resulted  in  a 
complete  arrangement,  which  was  unanimously  confirmed  by 
the  Council  on  June  24th.  Lord  Randolph  was  profoundly 
dissatisfied  with  this  settlement,  and  determined  to  appeal 
to  the  Sheffield  Conference  to  change  completely  the 
membership  of  the  Council  by  expelling  from  it  all  the 
members  who  had  acted  together  in  thwarting  his  plans. 
On  July  2 1st  he  sent  out  to  all  the  delegates  a  list  of  the 
gentlemen,  thirty  in  number,  "  proposed  by  Lord  Randolph 
Churchill  for  election  to  the  Council  of  the  National  Union/' 
With  it  was  a  lithographed  letter  from  himself.  He  said  : 

The  composition  of  a  representative  powerful  ;and  inde- 
pendent Council  has  occupied  my  most  anxious  attention, 
and  I  most  earnestly  trust  that  the  subjoined  list  may 
meet  with  your  approval  and  receive  your  support. 

On  the  23rd  Lord  Salisbury  spoke  at  a  large  meeting  at 
Sheffield  upon  the  action  of  the  House  of  Lords  with  regard 
to  parliamentary  reform.  I  made  a  speech  at  that  meet- 
ing. Lord  Randolph  absented  himself*  So  did  Gorst  and 


1882-4]  LORD   RANDOLPH'S  DEFEAT  217 

Forwood,  who  were  busy  at  the  Victoria  Hotel  organising 
victory  for  the  next  day. 

Four  hundred  and  fifty  delegates  were  present  at  the 
conference.  It  was  a  good  straight  fight.  Lord  Randolph 
exhorted  them  to  vote  for  his  list,  and  so  clear  away  from 
the  Council  those  who  obstructed  him.  I  reminded  them 
that  the  men  he  desired  to  ostracise  had  worked  for  the 
Conservative  party,  in  and  through  the  National  Union, 
for  years  before  he  had  taken  part  in  political  work.  So 
amid  cheers  and  counter-cheers  we  went  to  the  voting. 

Lord  Randolph's  name  was  on  both  lists,  and  when  the 
numbers  were  announced  he  stood  first  with  346  votes. 
Forwood,  a  new  candidate,  widely  and  deservedly  popular 
in  the  north  of  England,  and  Colonel  Burnaby,  the  second 
candidate  for  Birmingham,  and  just  then  a  popular  idol, 
were  second  and  third  with  298  and  293  votes.  But  the 
next  four  names  were  the  important  ones,  and  their  position 
on  the  list  showed  that  the  conspirators  had  failed.  They 
were  :  Clarke,  289  ;  Chaplin,  271  ;  Gorst,  264  ;  Wolff,  261. l 
Twenty-two  were  elected  from  Lord  Randolph's  list,  and 
nineteen  from  Earl  Percy's :  some  names  had  appeared  on 
both.  Three  were  elected  who  had  not  been  on  either.  These 
were :  SirM.  Hicks-Beach,  212  ;  Colonel  King-Harman,  212  ; 
and  Mr.  Arthur  Balfour,  186.  Lord  Randolph's  friends 
went  away  shouting  at  their  apparent  victory.  Most  of 
us  came  back  to  London  by  the  6.25  North-Eastern  train, 
and  at  Rugby  we  stayed  for  a  few  minutes,  and  I  met 
Sir  Henry  Wolff.  "  Well,  we  have  beaten  you,"  he  said. 
"Not  a  bit  of  it,"  I  replied.  "You  go  carefully  over  the 
names  and  numbers  to-morrow  morning,  and  you  will  see 
they  tell  a  different  story." 

The  next  day  Lord  Randolph  surrendered.  Sir  Michael 
Hicks-Beach  became  chairman  of  the  National  Union,  which 
reverted  to  the  functions  it  had  so  successfully  exercised, 
and  Lord  Randolph  was  not  seen  there  again. 

Whether  the  capitulation  was  prudent  or  unwise  it  had 

1  A  curiously  inaccurate  statement  as  to  this  will  be  found  in  the  Life 
of  Lord  Randolph  Churchill,  ch.  i,  p.  355,  and  The  Fourth  Party,  p.  300. 


2i8    POLITICS  IN  THE  HOUSE  OF  COMMONS  [CHAP,  xix 

one  very  definite  and  important  result.  It  destroyed  the 
Fourth  party.  Gorst  was  not  in  town  and  was  not  in  any 
way  consulted.  He  strongly  resented  the  breach  of  an 
express  agreement  which  had  been  made  when  he  risked  his 
political  future  by  joining  in  this  campaign  that  no  step 
should  be  taken  without  his  approval.  And  he  refused 
to  attend  the  dinner  which  Lord  Salisbury  gave  to  the 
new  Council  to  show  that  all  dissensions  were  now  at 
an  end. 

During  these  two  years  of  conflict,  and  indeed  during  the 
whole  of  his  political  life,  my  friendship  with  Lord  Randolph, 
which  had  begun  at  Woodstock  in  1874,  was  never  inter- 
rupted. I  dined  with  him  at  his  club,  and  he  dined  with 
me  at  the  Garrick.  Sometimes  he  talked  to  me  about  what 
he  intended  to  do  in  the  House,  and  once  at  least,  at  his 
request,  I  intervened  in  debate  in  order  to  draw  Mr.  Childers 
and  give  him  the  opportunity  of  reply. 

And  it  was  not  long  after  the  stormy  fight  at  Sheffield 
that  he  asked  me  to  come  to  Birmingham  and  make  a  couple 
of  speeches  for  him.  One  was  at  a  dinner  of  the  local  Con- 
servative association,  and  the  other  on  the  following  day 
was  at  Aston  Park.  It  had  been  arranged  to  hold  a  great 
meeting  at  the  Skating  Rink  there,  and  to  show  that  all 
differences  had  passed  away  Sir  Stafford  Northcote  had 
promised  to  make  the  principal  speech.  Sir  Stafford  and  a 
large  party  of  Members  of  Parliament  arrived  at  the  Park 
at  the  appointed  time.  But  the  friends  of  Mr.  Chamberlain 
had  been  busy.  Hundreds  of  forged  tickets  had  been 
printed  and  used  without  detection.  But  this  was  not 
enough.  A  wagon  with  a  heavy  piece  of  timber  was  brought 
to  the  part  of  the  Park  wall  nearest  to  the  Skating  Rink, 
and  shortly  before  the  time  fixed  for  the  meeting  the  timber 
was  used  as  a  battering-ram,  the  wall  was  broken  down,  and  a 
crowd  of  roughs  rushed  through  the  gap  and  took  possession 
of  the  Rink.  When  we  reached  the  Park  we  heard  that  the 
large  hall  was  in  the  hands  of  the  mob,  who  were  breaking 
up  the  chairs  (Jim  Lowther  said  they  were  engaged  in  the 
redistribution  of  seats),  and  that  it  would  be  dangerous  for 


1882-4]  ASTON  PARK  219 

our  party  to  try  to  reach  the  platform.  But  Sir  Stafford 
insisted  on  making  the  attempt.  There  was  a  smaller  hall 
near  the  chief  entrance  to  the  Park,  and  it  was  arranged 
that  this  should  be  filled  by  our  friends  and  the  doors  strongly 
guarded,  and  that  I  should  start  a  meeting  there  and  go 
on  speaking  until  we  heard  how  the  Skating  Rink  party  had 
fared.  It  was  not  a  very  pleasant  task,  but  I  did  not  have 
to  speak  long.  Presently  shouting  was  heard,  and  Sir 
Stafford,  with  a  broken  hat,  and  his  habitual  calm  a  little 
disturbed,  was  brought  back  through  the  crowd  and  with 
some  difficulty  guarded  from  personal  violence.  He  came 
on  the  platform  of  the  small  hall,  made  an  excellent  speech, 
and  as  the  reporters  had  been  told  of  our  arrangements 
the  meeting  was  fully  reported.  I  think  the  blackguardism 
of  our  opponents,  the  riot  at  the  Skating  Rink,  and  our 
subsequent  meeting,  did  our  cause  far  more  good  than  we 
should  have  had  from  an  undisturbed  demonstration  at  the 
Rink. 

I  was  always  fond  of  financial  questions,  and  in  1884  I 
had  provoked  a  somewhat  violent  controversy  by  attacking 
in  a  speech  at  Mount  Edgcumbe  the  Financial  Reform 
Almanack,  then  issued  each  year  by  the  powerful  Financial 
Association  of  Liverpool.  I  called  it  "  a  magazine  of  lies." 
When  the  phrase  was  resented,  I  quoted  from  the  Almanack 
twenty-two  specific  statements,  every  one  of  which  was 
untrue. 

Between  the  date  of  the  Sheffield  Conference  and  that 
of  the  Aston  Park  riot  I  went  to  the  annual  meeting  of 
the  Conservative  association  at  Plymouth,  and  there 
challenged  upon  this  question  of  national  finance  the  most 
doughty  of  all  combatants. 

The  Prime  Minister  had,  three  weeks  earlier,  on  Sep- 
tember ist,  made  a  speech  to  his  constituents  which 
contained  the  following  passage: 

I  will  give  you  with  the  utmost  exactness  a  comparative 
statement  which  it  is  quite  impossible  for  them  [the  Tories] 
to  shake,  and  which  I  will  convey  to  you  in  no  very  great 


220    POLITICS  IN  THE  HOUSE  OF  COMMONS  [CHAP,  xix 

number  of  words,  avoiding  all  detail,  lumping  all  large  sums 
of  money,  and  making  use  of  round  numbers  for  the  sake 
of  greater  simplicity  and  intelligibility.  For  the  last  four 
years  of  the  late  Government  the  gross  expenditure  of  the 
country  was  £329,000,000  ;  in  the  last  four  years  of  the 
present  Government — do  not  be  alarmed — the  expenditure 
of  the  country  has  been  £342,000,000  ;  that  is,  apparently, 
in  comparing  the  two  Governments,  our  account  is 
£13,000,000  to  the  bad.  Let  us  look  a  little  further  into 
the  matter.  I  must  first  of  all  deduct  the  expense  of  collec- 
tion. You  know  we  have  vast  establishments  connected 
with  post-offices,  telegraphs,  and  so  forth.  To  charge 
them  to  taxation  would  be  absurd.  I  do  not  therefore  take 
the  expense  of  collection,  and  the  two  sums  then  would  be 
— that  for  the  late  Government  297!  millions,  and  that 
for  the  present  Government  3o6|  millions.  There  are  still 
9  J  millions  remaining  to  the  bad  against  us ;  but  I  go  further, 
and  I  deduct  the  debt  we  have  paid  off,  because  undoubtedly 
what  you  spend  in  the  payment  of  debt  ought  not  to  be 
reckoned  as  expenditure.  We  have  paid,  as  I  have  told 
you,  25  millions  of  debt  against  n  millions  ;  and  conse- 
quently, when  we  bring  this  into  account,  we  are  no  longer 
to  the  bad,  but  are  to  the  good  jby  the  amount  of  4!- 
millions. 

A  little  later  on  in  the  speech  he  again  said,  "  So  far  I 
have  been  dealing  with  matters  of  fact,  and  no  man  can 
shake  one  of  the  figures  I  have  laid  before  you." 

At  my  meeting  at  Plymouth  on  September  22nd  I  quoted 
that  statement  and  declared  that  every  figure  in  it  was 
wrong. 

As  I  hoped  and  expected  a  Plymouth  Radical  sent  the  full 
report  of  my  speech  to  Mr.  Gladstone.  He  replied  that 
he  was  prepared  to  stand  by  the  figures  he  had  used.  I 
returned  to  the  attack  in  a  later  speech,  and  the  Prime 
Minister  then  said  that  he  believed  his  figures  might  be 
relied  upon,  and  that  I  did  not  appear  able  to  comprehend 
the  system  on  which  the  finances  of  the  country  were 
conducted. 

The  fact  was  that  the  figures  were  not  really  Mr.  Glad- 
stone's at  all.  They  had  been  supplied  to  him  by  a  young 


1882-4]  FINANCE  221 

official  in  the  Post  Office  through  Mr.  Fawcett,  who  was  then 
Postmaster-General,  and  the  Prime  Minister  had  incau- 
tiously used  them  without  examination. 

The  opportunity  of  encountering  the  great  financier  on 
the  field  where  he  had  been  so  long  supreme  was  not  to  be 
lost.  So  as  soon  as  Parliament  reassembled  I  wrote  to 
Mr.  Gladstone,  saying  that  unless  he  suggested  another  con- 
venient opportunity  I  would  move  a  formal  addition  to  the 
Address  and  so  secure  a  discussion.  He  replied  in  a  letter 
which  is  so  admirable  an  example  of  his  epistolary  style, 
with  its  reservations  and  qualifications,  that  I  think  it  is 
worth  quoting  in  full. 

10,  DOWNING  STREET,  WHITEHALL, 
October  25th,  1884. 

MY  DEAR  SIR, 

I  thank  you  for  your  courteous  note,  but  I  am 
altogether  unable  to  concur  in  the  arrangement  you 
suggest,  and  I  even  hope  you  will  substitute  some  other 
for  it. 

To  move  an  amendment  to  the  Address  for  the  purpose 
of  introducing  a  discussion  which  has  for  its  aim  to  settle 
a  difference  of  opinion,  or  of  figures,  between  two  members, 
as  to  retrospective  finance — in  short,  to  use  the  Queen's 
Speech  and  the  Answer  to  it  as  an  occasion  parallel  to  the 
Friday  motion  of  Supply,  would  be  a  proceeding  (in  my 
view)  as  inconvenient  and  as  little  seemly  as  it  would  be 
unexampled. 

The  Committee  of  Supply  will  shortly  have  to  be  set  up, 
and  that,  with  all  the  usual  opportunities,  will  become  at 
once  available  when  the  House  has  dealt  with  the  Franchise 
Bill,  assuming  that  it  shares  the  view  of  the  Government 
as  to  the  particular  method  of  dealing  with  that  measure. 
I  do  not  say  that  there  is  no  objection  to  the  settlement  of 
such  a  matter  in  this  way,  for  I  think  there  is  ;  but  it  is  not 
open  to  the  same  grave  objections  as  the  introduction  of  it 
into  the  debate  on  the  Address. 

I  remain,  my  dear  sir, 
Faithfully  yours, 

W.  E,  GLADSTONE. 

E,  CLASKE,  ESQ.,  M,P. 


222    POLITICS  IN  THE  HOUSE  OF  COMMONS  [CHAP,  xix 
I  add  my  brief  reply  : 

37,  RUSSELL  SQUARE, 

October  2$th,  1884. 

DEAR  MR.  GLADSTONE, 

I  am  much  obliged  by  your  letter,  and  in  deference  to 
your  judgement  I  will  at  once  abandon  the  arrangement  I 
proposed,  and  will  let  the  matter  stand  over  until  Supply 
has  been  set  up.  At  the  same  time  I  regret  the  postpone- 
ment, and  I  hope  that  in  default  of  any  earlier  opportunity 
that  may  be  thought  an  appropriate  occasion  for  the  dis- 
cussion. 

Believe  me,  dear  Mr.  Gladstone, 
Faithfully  yours, 

EDWARD  CLARKE. 

THE  RIGHT  HON.  W.  E.  GLADSTONE,  M.P. 

Supply  was  set  up,  and  I  was  fortunate  in  the  ballot  and 
obtained  the  second  place  for  Friday,  November  2ist,  and 
on  that  evening  I  went  to  the  House  full  of  expectation 
of  a  conspicuous  triumph.  But  I  was  disappointed.  The 
astute  old  gentleman  had  found  a  way  of  escape. 

As  I  entered  the  House  a  long  envelope  was  handed  to  me, 
which  contained  a  note  from  Mr.  Gladstone,  in  which  he 
said  that  he  did  not  intend  to  make  any  reply.  This,  of 
course,  was  a  confession  of  defeat.  If  he  could  have  justified 
his  figures,  he  would  have  delighted  in  making  a  public 
example  of  an  opponent  who  had  ventured  to  question  his 
infallibility  in  finance.  The  reasons  he  gave  were  that  in 
an  incidental  debate  on  finance  a  week  or  two  earlier  I  had 
not  taken  part,  and  that  the  question  of  comparative  ex- 
penditure was  one  for  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  Mr. 
Childers,  to  deal  with.  These  were  transparent  pretences. 
My  controversy  was  not  with  Mr.  Childers,  but  with  him ; 
and  if  after  giving  notice  of  a  specific  motion  I  had  brought 
the  matter  up  in  the  course  of  a  general  debate,  I  should 
have  been  justly  accused  of  trying  to  take  my  adversary  at 
a  disadvantage. 

Enclosed  with  his  note  was  a  memorandum  covering  eight 
pages  of  quarto  paper.  It  was  dated  "  Downing  Street, 
November  2ist,  1884,"  but  is  not,  I  think,  in  his  hand' 


1882-4]  A  SPEECH  UNSPOKEN  223 

writing.  It  was  a  curious  document,  in  the  form  of  a 
dialogue  between  A  and  B ;  but  I  need  not  describe  it,  as 
any  one  still  interested  in  this  old  controversy  can  read  it 
in  The  Nineteenth  Century  of  December  1884.  It  suffices 
to  say  here  that  it  contained  no  reaffirmation  of  the  Edin- 
burgh figures. 

On  receiving  this  letter  and  memorandum,  I  at  once  went 
to  the  Speaker,  told  him  the  circumstances,  and  asked  his 
permission  to  make  a  personal  statement.  He  consented ; 
and  when  he  called  upon  me  I  read  Mr.  Gladstone's  letter, 
end  then  said  that  I  did  not  think  I  should  be  consulting 
the  convenience  of  the  House  in  making  a  speech  to  which 
no  answer  would  be  given.  I  said  I  would  put  the  substance 
of  the  speech  into  print,  and,  taking  advantage  of  the 
permission  given,  I  would  append  to  it  the  long  manuscript 
statement  which  the  letter  enclosed,  and  would  send  a 
copy  to  every  member  of  the  House. 

I  think  my  action  made  me  for  a  time  one  of  the  most 
popular  of  men.  That  a  lawyer,  having  the  House  at  his 
mercy,  and  primed  with  a  long  speech  on  a  dull  subject, 
should  refrain  from  delivering  it,  and  send  it  in  print,  so 
that  those  who  chose  to  do  so  might  read  it  and  consider 
it  at  their  leisure,  was  so  new  an  experience  that  I  believe 
the  incident  immediately  and  finally  relieved  me  from  the 
prejudice  which  was  undoubtedly  felt  in  the  House  against 
members  of  rny  profession.  As  I  left  the  Chamber  I  met 
in  the  Lobby  my  old  friend  James  Knowles.  "  Let  me 
have  your  speech/'  he  said.  "  I  want  it  for  my  December 
number,  and  it  will  be  just  in  time."  I  told  him  I  had 
never  in  my  life  written  out  a  speech  in  full  before  delivering 
it,  and  had  no  manuscript  which  would  answer  his  purpose. 
"  Well,  if  I  send  you  a  shorthand  writer  to-morrow  morning, 
will  you  dictate  it  to  him  ?  "  I  agreed,  and  the  next  day 
I  delivered  my  speech  walking  up  and  down  my  delightful 
library  at  Russell  Square.  The  proof  was  corrected  on 
Monday  (the  24th),  and  two  or  three  days  later  The  Nine- 
teenth Century  containing  it  was  issued  to  the  trade.  The 
incident  was  pleasantly  closed  by  Mr.  Knowles  sending  me 


224    POLITICS  IN  THE  HOUSE  OF  COMMONS  [CHAP,  xix 

a  cheque  for  fifteen  guineas,  which  added  to  my  library  a 
fine  edition  of  Swift's  works. 

The  promised  pamphlet  was  duly  sent  to  every  member 
of  each  House  of  Parliament. 

Of  course  I  had  not  resolved  upon  putting  down  an  amend- 
ment to  the  Address  without  consulting  my  leader  in  the 
House  of  Commons. 

I  wrote  to  him  from  Plymouth,  remonstrating  on  his 
having  apparently  accepted  the  Edinburgh  figures  as  correct, 
and  in  reply  he  asked  me  to  come  and  dine  and  sleep  at 
Pynes,  or  at  all  events  to  come  and  lunch  there.  So  on 
October  loth  I  broke  my  journey  at  Exeter  and  drove  out 
to  his  beautiful  old  house.  There  I  spent  a  delightful 
afternoon.  We  did  not  talk  much  about  finance,  for  I  took 
with  me  a  startling  bit  of  news  on  a  more  important 
subject  than  the  accuracy  of  Mr.  Gladstone's  figures.  At 
Exeter  I  had  found  the  London  newspapers,  and  there 
in  The  Standard  was  printed  the  full  text  of  the  Redistribu- 
tion Bill,  upon  the  production  of  which  the  Tories  had  been 
clamorously  insisting.  In  those  days  there  were  no  tele- 
phones, but  it  seemed  to  me  very  strange  that,  with  the 
telegraph  wires  available,  the  leader  of  the  Opposition  in 
the  House  of  Commons  should  at  two  o'clock  in  the  after- 
noon be  quite  ignorant  of  such  a  document  having  been 
published  eight  hours  earlier.  Our  conversation  was  mainly 
about  the  position  of  the  Reform  question.  The  Franchise 
Bill,  which  in  April  had  passed  its  second  reading  in  the 
House  of  Commons  by  a  majority  of  more  than  three  to  two 
(340  to  210),  and  had  been  read  a  third  time  without  an 
opposing  vote,  had  been  practically  rejected  by  the  House 
of  Lords ;  and  Parliament  had  been  prorogued  and  an  autumn 
session  fixed  for  October  2ist,  in  order  that  it  might  again 
be  rapidly  passed  and  sent  up  to  the  Lords  with  the  menace 
that  if  they  dared  again  to  reject  it  they  would  imperil  the 
power,  if  not  the  existence,  of  their  House.  Sir  Stafford 
complained  bitterly  that  he  was  being  ignored  in  certain 
negotiations  which  he  believed  were  going  on.  He  told  me 
that  the  Duke  of  Richmond  had  been  to  Balmoral,  and  he 


1882-4]        ANOTHER  OPPORTUNITY   MISSED  225 

thought  that  Lord  Salisbury  and  the  Duke  and  Lord 
Cairns  were  busy  in  negotiations  from  which  he  was  entirely 
excluded.  He  was  mistaken  in  this.  The  suggestions  which 
the  Queen  had  made  in  September  to  the  Duke  of  Richmond 
had  led  to  no  result. 

Two  days  before  the  meeting  of  Parliament  in  October 
1884  I  was  at  the  Carlton,  and  met  Edward  Stanhope  and 
Lord  George  Hamilton,  and  asked  if  anything  had  been 
arranged  as  to  the  course  of  the  Conservative  party.  They 
said  no,  so  I  saw  Henry  Northcote  and  found  from  him  that 
no  plans  had  been  settled,  but  that  a  meeting  of  the  members 
of  the  late  Government  was  to  take  place  at  Sir  Stafford 
Northcote's  house  the  afternoon  before  Parliament  met. 

I  thereupon  drafted  an  amendment  to  the  Address,  and 
urged  upon  Northcote  that  it  would  be  a  serious  blunder  to 
take  a  great  party  division  upon  the  second  reading  of  the 
Franchise  Bill,  as  it  was  quite  certain  that  we  could  not 
now  detach  any  Liberals  from  their  party. 

The  amendment  I  drafted  was  in  these  terms : 

That  the  House  humbly  assures  Her  Majesty  of  its  willing- 
ness to  proceed  immediately  to  the  consideration  of  the 
question  of  Reform  and  its  desire  to  arrive  at  a  fair  and 
just  settlement  of  the  whole  question,  and  to  that  end  it 
humbly  prays  Her  Majesty  to  cause  the  proposals  of  Her 
Majesty's  Government  with  respect  to  the  redistribution  of 
seats  to  be  laid  upon  the  table  of  the  House,  and  assures 
Her  Majesty  that  those  proposals  shall  be  diligently  and 
carefully  considered. 

I  suggested  that  if  this  were  moved  as  an  amendment  to 
the  Address  all  the  Irish  party  and  a  certain  number  of 
Liberals  might  be  expected  to  vote  for  it,  and  so  induce  the 
Government  to  come  to  a  reasonable  agreement  by  sub- 
stantially diminishing  their  majority. 

Northcote  took  the  draft  to  give  to  his  father.  A  few  days 
afterwards  I  heard  from  him  and  from  Stanhope,  to  whom 
I  had  also  spoken  on  the  matter,  that  the  proposal  had 
been  discussed  at  the  meeting  at  Sir  Stafford's,  and  that 


226    POLITICS  IN  THE  HOUSE  OF  COMMONS  [CHAP, 

Lord  Salisbury  as  well  as  Stanhope  was  in  favour  of  it,  and 
that  Sir  Stafford  was  also  inclined  to  support  it.  It  was, 
however,  set  aside  in  deference  chiefly,  so  Henry  Northcote 
told  me,  to  the  objections  of  James  Lowther  and  Rowland 
Winn,  who  thought  that  it  would  obtain  for  us  so  good  a 
division  that  afterwards  when  we  came  to  divide  upon  the 
Franchise  Bill  itself  it  would  appear  that  our  supporters 
were  falling  away  from  us. 

The  result  of  this  decision  was  that  we  divided  again 
against  the  second  reading  of  the  Franchise  Bill,  did  not 
get  a  single  vote  from  the  Irish  or  the  Liberal  party,  and 
were  beaten  by  a  majority  of  140. 

The  very  day  after  I  had  my  conversation  with  Sir  Stafford 
at  Pynes  the  Queen  suggested  to  Lord  Salisbury  that  the 
leaders  of  the  Opposition  should  be  prepared  to  negotiate 
with  the  Government  on  the  basis  of  a  very  moderate 
speech  made  by  Lord  Hartington  at  Hanley,  in  which, 
to  Mr.  Gladstone's  dissatisfaction,  he  had  used  the  word 
"  compromise."  In  the  negotiations  which  followed  Sir 
Stafford  took  a  very  important  part. 

On  November  I4th  he  had  a  private  conversation  with 
Mr.  Gladstone,  in  which,  Lord  Morley  says,  "  they  made  good 
progress  on  the  principles  of  redistribution."  *  And  five 
days  later  there  began  a  remarkable  series  of  meetings  at 
Downing  Street,  where  Lord  Salisbury  and  Sir  Stafford  met 
the  Prime  Minister  and  some  of  his  colleagues,  the  Govern- 
ment scheme  was  produced  and  discussed,  and  the  main 
provisions  of  the  Bill  were  practically  agreed.  A  dangerous 
constitutional  conflict  was  averted  ;  a  sound  measure  of 
redistribution  of  political  power  was  carried  through  ;  the 
privilege  and  responsibility  of  the  franchise  were  widely 
extended  ;  and  so  far  from  producing  the  revolutionary 
results  very  freely  predicted,  it  happened  after  the  Reform 
Bill  of  1884,  as  after  those  of  1832  and  1867,  that  the  next 
election  but  one  put  into  power  those  who  had  most  feared 
its  effects.  To  the  wisdom  and  tact  of  the  Queen  and  her 
resolute  perseverance  in  the  face  of  many  difficulties  the 

1  Life  of  Gladstone,  ch.  iii,  p.  136. 


1882-4]  A  DIFFICULT  SITUATION  227 

country  was  chiefly  indebted  ;  but  all  the  statesmen  con- 
cerned were  entitled  to  share  the  credit,  and  especially  Lord 
Salisbury,  who  had  the  hardest  task  of  all.  To  the  very 
last  he  was  doubtful  of  success. 

On  November  I5th  I  wrote  to  him  from  Russell  Square, 
enclosing  a  memorandum  : 

DEAR  LORD  SALISBURY, 

I  apologise  for  troubling  you  who  have  so  many 
counsellors,  and  need  them  so  little,  but  I  am  very  anxious 
about  the  present  situation,  and  think  the  suggestion  in 
the  enclosed  memorandum  may  offer  a  reasonable  solution. 
The  essentials  of  a  compromise,  which  I  think  very  desir- 
able, are — 

(1)  That  the  Government  should  appear  to  succeed  by 
putting  the  Franchise  Bill  upon  the  Statute  Book  without 
making  its  operation  contingent  upon  the  passing  of  a  Re- 
distribution Bill. 

(2)  That  the  House  of  Lords  should  succeed  in  making  it 
practically  impossible  that  an  election  should  take  place 
on   the  new   franchise  and  the  old  constituencies.      The 

suggestion  of  F would  only  secure  the  first  of  these 

essentials,  and  I  think  mine  would  secure  both. 

Believe  me,  my  dear  Lord  Salisbury, 
Very  faithfully  yours, 

EDWARD  CLARKE. 

The  enclosed  Memorandum  : 

(1)  House  of  Lords  to  pass  the  second  reading  of  the 
Franchise  Bill. 

(2)  Government  then  to  introduce  Redistribution  Bill  in 
House   of   Commons,    declaring   that   Parliament  will   be 
adjourned,  not  prorogued,  and  the  Redistribution  Bill  taken 
in  precedence  of  all  Government  measures. 

(3)  Names  of  Boundary  Commissioners  or  the  mode  of 
their  selection  to  be  agreed. 

(4)  House  of  Lords  thereupon  to  pass  the  Franchise  Bill, 
amended  by  inserting  [Mr.  F.'s  clause]  instead  of  January  ist, 
1885,  these  words :  "  January  ist,  1886,  or  such  earlier  date  as 
may  be  appointed  by  any  Act  passed  lor  the  Redistribution 
of  Seats  " ;  or  these  words :  "  January  ist,  1886,  unless  before 
that  date  an  Act  shall  be  passed  for  the  Redistribution  of 


228    POLITICS  IN  THE  HOUSE  OF  COMMONS  [CHAP. 

Seats,  in  which  case  this  Act  shall  come  into  operation  on 
the  day  when  the  royal  assent  shall  be  given  to  such  Act 
for  the  Redistribution  of  Seats." 

No.  3  might  be  given  up  by  way  of  compromise. 

The  words  suggested  in  (4)  escape  the  objection  taken 

by  Mr.  Gladstone  to  Mr. 's  words — There  can  be 

no  double  register.  They  do  not  definitely  postpone  the 
operation  of  the  Franchise  Bill. 

They  practically  secure  the  requirements  of  the  House 
of  Lords. 

This  Government  may  pass  the  Bill  now  to  be  brought 
forward. 

In  that  case  election  in  the  spring  of  1886  on  new  con- 
stituencies. The  election  will  not  then  have  been  delayed 
a  single  day  by  the  action  of  the  House  of  Lords. 

The  Government  may  fail. 

Then  there  must  be  a  dissolution  upon  the  old  franchise. 
If  Liberals  win,  they  were  pledged  to  moderate  redistribu- 
tion, and  Conservatives  are  no  worse  off  than  before,  rather 
better.  If  Conservatives  win,  they  have  the  session  of 
1886  to  either  (i)  pass  Redistribution  Bill,  or  (2)  pass  a  Bill 
postponing  the  operation  of  the  Franchise  Bill 

Lord  Salisbury  replied  the  next  day : 

MY  DEAR  CLARKE, 

I  agree  with  you  in  thinking  a  compromise  desirable 
under  all  the  circumstances  of  the  case,  but  I  do  not  think 
your  proposal  gives  us  sufficient  security  against  an  election 
on  the  old  constituencies  with  the  new  franchise.  There  is 
a  gap — the  interval  between  January  ist  and  April  26th, 
1887.  If  it  did  happen  that  redistribution  were  not  finished 
in  1886,  the  pressure  would  be  very  strong  and  practically 
irresistible  to  hold  the  dissolution  over  the  New  Year,  so  as 
to  allow  the  two  million  capables  to  vote.  If  your  proposal 
said  January  1887,  it  would  no  doubt  be  more  favourable. 

Yours  very  truly, 
SALISBURY. 

A  few  days  later  I  sent  another  memorandum  upon  the 
political  position : 

Franchise  Bill  has  passed  the  Commons  by  majority  of 
140,  and  the  House  has  by  a  majority  of  85  refused  to  make 


1882-4]  THE    OUTLOOK  229 

its  operation  (in  terms)  dependent  upon  the  passing  of  a 
Redistribution  Bill. 
The  House  of  Lords  may  : 

(1)  Reject. 

(2)  Pass    second  reading    and  postpone    Committee    to 
February  next. 

Of  these  courses  the  second  would  be  far  the  best  for 
three  reasons  : 

(1)  It  could  not  be  usefully  alleged  that  the  Lords  had 
thrown  out  the  Bill. 

(2)  It  would  greatly  embarrass  the  Government. 

(3)  It  would  take  away  all  excuse  for  the  creation  wof 
Peers. 

Rejection  would  be  a  defeat  to  which  the  Government 
could  not  submit ,  without  fatally  weakening  their  position 
in  Parliament  and  in  the  country. 

They  must  then  either — 

Obtain  the  creation  of  Peers  (to  be  avoided  by  the 
adoption  of  the  second  course). 

R  sien     I  These  both  mean  dissolution,  for  a  Conserva- 

Dissolve  1  **ve  "^ktry  could  not  meet  this  Parlia- 
t  ment  with  advantage. 

What  are  the  prospects  of  a  dissolution  ? 

Probably  the  Tory  party  would  gain  so  many  seats  as 
to  have  a  majority  over  the  Liberals,  the  parties  being : 

Tory 300 

Liberal 270 

Parnellites 90 

660 

What  must  then  happen  ? 

The  new  Government  would  let  1885  pass  by ;  the 
moderate  Liberals  would  probably  decline  to  join  the  Par- 
nellites in  ejecting  them. 

But  in  1886  it  would  be  necessary  to  make  arrangements 
for  a  Reform  Bill,  and  in  1887  one  must  be  proposed,  and 
that  Bill  would  emerge  from  the  House  of  Commons  a  much 
more  Radical  measure  than  can  be  got  now.  But  the 
result  of  an  election  might  be  that  the  Liberals  would  have 
a  majority.  In  that  case  they  could  do  just  what  they 
pleased,  for  it  would  then  be  practically  impossible  for  the 
House  of  Lords  to  interfere  at  all. 
16 


230    POLITICS  IN  THE  HOUSE  OF  COMMONS  [CHAP,  xix 

There  are  reasons  why  it  would  be  well  for  the  Tory  party 
that  the  election  should  be  postponed. 

The  difficulties  of  Egypt  and  Ireland  are  not  at  their 
worst. 

Increased  taxation  will  be  immediately  required. 

Agricultural  and  commerciaj  depression  is  increasing. 

The  Government  have  succeeded  in  removing  the  impres- 
sion that  they  desired  or  had  any  reason  to  conceal  their 
scheme. 

An  immediate  reply  came  from  Hatfield,  dated  November 
24th: 

A  line  to  thank  you  for  your  very  suggestive  paper. 
The  difficulty  is  the  profound  division  of  opinion  among 
our  own  friends,  and  it  is  a  difficulty  which  grows  the  worse 
the  more  we  look  at  it. 

Ever  yours  truly, 

SALISBURY. 

By  way  of  personal  history  I  may  here  put  in  a  few 
sentences  from  my  letters  written  from  the  House  to  my 
wife,  who  was  then  at  Hastings : 

November  zoth,   1884. 

All  things  seem  in  confusion  down  here.  The  Government 
cannot  tell  us  what  is  to  be  done  in  Egypt,  nor  what  they 
propose  to  spend  on  the  Navy  ;  so  probably  we  shall  adjourn 
on  Monday  for  a  week.  But  I  believe  that  nothing  will 
prevent  my  attack  on  the  old  gentleman  coming  on  to- 
morrow, so  I  am  going  home  presently  to  put  the  finishing 
touches  to  the  speech.  The  Radicals  are  delightfully  savage, 
and  there  has  been  a  very  definite  rumour  of  Mr.  Chamber- 
lain's resignation,  but  I  fear  it  is  too  good  to  be  true.  When 
I  was  in  the  middle  of  the  last  sentence,  Labouchere  came  up 
to  speak  to  me  about  to-morrow  evening.  He  has  given 
notice  of  a  motion  attacking  the  House  of  Lords,  and  he  says 
he  is  going  to  dilate  on  "  the  humiliating  surrender,  the  old 
man  grovelling  on  his  knees  before  the  Peers."  It  will  be 
fun,  and  as  I  stand  next  after  him  I  shall  have  to  be  there. 

December  1st,   1884. 

Mr.  Gladstone  is  just  about  to  make  his  statement  about 
the  Redistribution  Bill,  and  I  do  not  know  what  sort  of 


1882-4]  A  CURIOUS   INCIDENT  231 

debate  will  arise  upon  it  to  keep  me  in  the  House,  so  I 
will  just  snatch  the  time  to  report  myself  all  safe  in  town.  . .  . 
There  is  plenty  of  excitement  here :  at  least  a  third  of  the 
members  will  have  to  stand  for  fresh  constituencies,  and 
most  of  them  do  not  seem  to  like  the  prospect.  Plymouth 
is  one  of  the  few  constituencies  which  are  "  not  too  large 
but  just  large  enough  "to  be  left  alone,  so  I  can  feel  philo- 
sophical. But  for  the  next  twelve  months  this  will  be  a  very 
singular  House  of  Commons.  Just  up:  so  I  must  be  off. 

The  publication  in  The  Standard  of  the  Cabinet  draft  of 
the  Redistribution  Bill  was  a  very  curious  incident.  The 
Spottiswoodes  had  for  a  long  time  been  the  Government 
printers,  and  for  a  time  it  was  believed  or  pretended  that 
they  were  responsible  for  the  betrayal  of  a  Cabinet  secret. 
They  were  at  once  notified  that  they  would  no  longer  be 
entrusted  with  Government  work.  The  heads  of  the  firm 
came  to  me  for  advice,  and  explained  to  me  the  elaborate 
precautions  which  were  taken  when  confidential  documents 
had  to  be  printed  for  use  by  the  Cabinet.  A  group  of  the 
most  experienced  and  trustworthy  men  in  their  employ 
were  entrusted  with  the  work.  The  manuscript  was 
separated  into  small  parts,  and  so  distributed  to  different 
men  in  different  places  that  no  printer  ever  had  in  his  hands, 
or  could  get  access  to,  the  whole  document.  Only  as  many 
copies  were  printed  as  there  were  members  of  the  Cabinet, 
and  these  copies  were  all  numbered. 

On  my  advice  statutory  declarations  were  made  by  the 
persons  who  in  this  case  had  been  employed  on  the  work,  and 
were  sent  to  the  Treasury.  In  a  short  time  Spottiswoodes 
were  restored  to  their  position.  I  have  always  been  curious 
as  to  the  explanation  of  this  incident.  It  may  have  been 
a  disloyal  act  on  the  part  of  an  individual  member  of  the 
Cabinet ;  it  seems  to  me  more  likely  that  it  was  a  calculated 
indiscretion,  not  disapproved  by  the  body  of  its  members, 
and  intended  to  assist  the  process  of  negotiation  by  directing 
attention  to  the  details  of  a  redistribution  scheme. 

The  subject  which  interested  me  most  in  the  Reform 
discussions  was  that  of  Proportional  Representation.  I 


232    POLITICS  IN  THE  HOUSE  OF  COMMONS  [CHAP. 

worked  actively  with  Mr.  Courtney  and  Sir  John  Lubbock 
in  the  public  meetings  at  which  Mr.  Hare's  system  was 
practically  illustrated.  And  I  should  like  to  quote  two 
sentences  from  the  report  in  Hansard  of  the  speech  which 
I  made  in  the  House  of  Commons  in  Committee  on  the 
Franchise  Bill: 

I  can  hardly  imagine  a  Reform  Bill  so  extensive  that  it 
would  be  unsafe  to  adopt  it  if  it  were  associated  with  the 
principle  of  Proportional  Representation. 

With  regard  to  that  principle,  valuable  as  I  think  it  would 
be,  and  safe  as  it  would  make  the  enlargement  of  the  fran- 
chise, it  is  the  only  means  by  which  it  will  be  possible 
permanently  to  retain  Ireland  within  the  parliamentary 
system  of  this  country,  and  therefore  I  heartily  wish  it  could 
be  incorporated  in  the  present  measure.1 

There  is  one  other  speech  made  by  me  in  the  eventful 
year  of  1884  which  I  think  I  ought  to  mention,  as  it  had  some 
effect  on  my  fortunes  at  Plymouth  a  good  many  years  later. 

At  one  of  my  meetings  there  I  had  been  asked  whether  I 
was  in  favour  of  the  Bill  for  permitting  marriage  with  a 
deceased  wife's  sister.  I  replied  that  I  was.  The  High 
Church  party  at  Plymouth  was  very  strong,  and  included 
some  of  the  most  influential  men  of  the  town.  Their  leader 
among  the  clergy  was  my  dear  friend  the  Rev.  G.  R. 
Prynne,  the  vicar  for  fifty  years  of  St.  Peter's,  Plymouth, 
a  man  of  saintly  character,  honoured  and  loved  by  all 
who  knew  him.  We  differed  widely  in  opinion  on  Church 
matters,  but  in  political  affairs  he  was  my  staunch  supporter. 
He  went  so  far  as  to  write  an  election  song  which  was  sung 
at  my  meetings  in  1886.  The  leader  of  the  High  Church 
laity  was  Mr.  John  Shelly,  a  lawyer  of  high  character  who  had 
been  Mayor  of  Plymouth,  a  man  of  wealth  and  influence 
and  a  devoted  Churchman.  He  and  most  of  the  High 
Churchmen  belonged  to  the  Liberal  party ;  but  a  few,  and 
they  not  unimportant  in  the  then  nicely  balanced  condition 
of  political  parties  in  the  town,  were  among  my  Conservative 
supporters.  In  the  early  part  of  1884  I  received  a  letter 

1  Hansard,  vol.  cclxxxv   p.  398. 


1882-4]  DECEASED   WIFE'S   SISTER  233 

signed  by  a  number  of  my  constituents  urging  me  to  vote 
against  the  Deceased  Wife's  Sister  Bill,  or  at  all  events  to 
refrain  from  voting  or  speaking  in  its  favour.  I  at  once 
replied  that  my  conduct  in  Parliament  must  be  guided 
entirely  by  my  own  convictions,  and  I  prepared,  and  on 
May  6th,  1884,  delivered,  a  speech  in  support  of  the  Bill, 
which  is  reprinted  in  my  Selected  Speeches,1  and  is  the  fullest 
expression  of  the  opinions  on  this  subject  which  have  been 
sustained  by  the  thought  and  experience  of  the  many  years 
which  have  passed  since. 

I  have  given  a  large  and  perhaps  a  disproportionate  space 
to  the  record  of  my  political  work  during  the  years  1882 
to  1884,  but  these  years  were  in  some  respects  the  most 
important  years  of  my  life.     In  a  former  chapter  I  have 
spoken  of  my  good  fortune  in  coming  into  the  House  of 
Commons  just  at  the  time  when  my  leaders  were  ejected 
from  office  and  were  specially  inclined  to  favour  a  new 
recruit  who  was  likely  to  be  of  service  in  debate.     This 
advantage  I  did  not  throw  away.     I  carefully  chose  my 
opportunities  of  speaking,  and  never  spoke  at  great  length. 
I  was  always  willing  to  oblige  the  Whips  by  going  to  speak 
at  contested  elections  or  at  political  meetings  in  or  not 
far  from  London,  and  I  think  that  during  my  time  of  active 
political  work   I  must  have  made  as  many  speeches  on 
public  platforms  as  any  member  of  the  party.     At  the  end 
of  this  volume  I  will  give  a  list  of  places  outside  London 
at  which  I  have  made  political  speeches,  and  it  will  represent 
a  good  deal  of  activity.     Of  course  I  have  no  record  of  the 
multitudinous  speeches  made  in  the  London  constituencies. 
But  I  never  allowed  the  Whips  to  have  anything  to  do  with 
my  speaking  in  the  House  itself.    The  great  danger  of  a 
young  member,  anxious  to  oblige  them  and  to  distinguish 
himself,  is  the  being  induced  to  speak — just  to  keep  the 
debate  going — when  he  has  not  prepared  a  speech.     Then  he 
always  fails,  and  the  House  soon  ceases  to  take  an  interest 
in  him. 

This  is  the  mistake  which,  as  in  the  case  of  my  brilliant 
i  Selected  Speeches,  p.  62 


234    POLITICS  IN  THE  HOUSE  OF  COMMONS  [CHAP,  xix 

friend  Frank  Lockwood,  entirely  disappoints  so  many 
reasonable  expectations  of  success  in  the  House  of  Commons. 

I  did  not  speak  often,  and  never  without  preparation,  and 
prepared  many  more  speeches  than  I  had  the  opportunity 
of  delivering.  The  material  was  not  wasted,  for  I  had 
plenty  of  public  meetings  at  which  it  could  be  used.  So  by 
the  end  of  1884  I  had  done  a  great  deal  of  work  for  my 
party  in  and  out  of  the  House  ;  my  leaders  honoured  me 
with  their  confidence  and  friendship  ;  and  I  believe  I  was 
not  unpopular  with  members  of  either  of  the  three  political 
parties. 

Meanwhile  my  position  at  the  Bar  was  steadily  advancing. 
It  appeared  likely  that  I  should  be  able  to  take  a  not 
inconspicuous  part  in  the  political  crisis  which  all  believed 
would  be  reached  in  the  summer  of  1885. 


CHAPTER    XX 

AN   UNEXPECTED   CHECK  :    1885 

Iii  the  short  legal  holiday  at  the  end  of  1884  my  wife  and 
I  went  to  Belgium  for  a  fortnight  to  enjoy  pictures  and 
churches  at  Antwerp  and  Ghent  and  Bruges.  She  paid 
very  dearly  for  the  enjoyment,  for  an  abominably  insanitary 
hotel  at  Antwerp  sowed  the  seeds  of  typhoid  fever,  and  a 
few  weeks  later  she  had  a  very  dangerous  illness. 

Returning  home  on  January  gth,  I  had  a  pleasant  surprise 
in  finding  a  letter  awaiting  me  from  the  solicitor  to  the 
Conservative  party  in  Manchester,  saying  that  in  case  I  did 
not  intend  to  contest  Plymouth  at  the  next  election  they 
desired  to  put  a  safe  seat  for  one  of  the  divisions  of  that 
city  at  my  disposal.  The  idea  of  leaving  Plymouth  had 
never  entered  my  mind  ;  but  seeing  that  I  had  been  elected 
by  a  small  majority,  that  the  constituency  had  now  more 
than  doubled  in  number,  that  Sir  Edward  Bates,  through 
whose  disqualification  I  had  obtained  the  seat,  was  now 
coming  forward  again,  and  that  Macliver,  my  Liberal 
colleague,  had  shown  himself  a  very  diligent  and  useful 
member,  I  dare  say  my  prospect  of  re-election  did  not  look 
so  hopeful  to  others  as  it  did  to  myself. 

I  at  once  wrote  gratefully  acknowledging  the  honour  done 
me  by  the  offer,  but  adding  : 

I  am  pledged  to  stand  for  Plymouth,  where  I  have  every 
reason  to  believe  my  seat  is  perfectly  safe,  and  where  I 
received  in  1880  the  most  generous  welcome.  I  cannot 
therefore  accept  your  kind  invitation,  but  I  shall  always  be 
proud  to  have  received  it,  and  shall  feel  that  the  Conserva- 

235 


236  AN   UNEXPECTED   CHECK  [CHAP,  xx 

lives  of  Manchester  have  by  this  offer  created  an  abiding 
claim  upon  my  services  in  or  out  of  the  House  of  Commons. 

My  suggestion  in  the  second  memorandum  to  Lord  Salis- 
bury, that  the  difficulties  of  the  Government  with  regard  to 
Ireland  and  Egypt  were  not  at  their  worst,  was  soon  justified. 

On  January  24th  there  were  serious  explosions  of  dyna- 
mite at  the  Tower  of  London,  in  the  House  of  Commons,  and 
in  Westminster  Hall.  And  more  important  than  the  inci- 
dent itself  was  the  fact  that  Mr.  Parnell,  speaking  almost 
immediately  afterwards,  did  not  say  a  word  in  deprecation 
of  these  methods  of  political  agitation. 

Then  on  February  5th  came  the  news  of  General  Gordon's 
death  at  Khartoum.  Mr.  Gladstone  saw  at  once  that  this 
would  probably  bring  about  the  fall  of  the  Government,  and 
there  were  anxious  and  perplexed  discussions  in  the  Cabinet. 
Parliament  had  been  adjourned  from  December  6th  to 
February  igth,  and  in  the  angry  excitement  of  the  public 
mind  the  result  of  the  vote  of  censure  which  would  certainly 
be  moved  as  soon  as  the  House  of  Commons  assembled  was 
very  doubtful. 

It  was  at  that  critical  moment  that  Lord  Rosebery,  with 
fine  courage  and  patriotism,  became  a  member  of  a  Cabinet 
which  already  appeared  to  be  tottering  to  its  fall.  His 
adhesion  was  of  value  to  the  Prime  Minister  for  the  influence 
which  he  had  with  the  moderate  section  of  the  Liberal  party, 
rather  than  for  the  value  of  any  advice  he  could  give  upon 
the  difficulties  at  home  and  abroad,  with  the  details  of  which 
he  was  not  completely  acquainted.  And  it  did  not  prove  to 
be  an  unmixed  advantage.  Three  months  later  he  joined  the 
other  peers  in  the  Cabinet  in  rejecting  the  proposal  of  a 
central  body  in  Ireland  for  the  control  of  municipal  adminis- 
tration— a  decision  which  at  once  upset  the  Government 
ancj.  turned  the  Home  Rule  movement  into  more  dangerous 
channels. 

The  expected  vote  of  censure  was  moved  by  Sir  Stafford 
Northcote  on  February  23rd.  I  happened  to  notice  that 
it  was  the  anniversary  of  an  important  event  in  Mr.  Glad- 


1885]  AN   INTERESTING  DATE  237 

stone's  life.  On  February  23rd,  1855,  speaking  from  the 
ex-minister's  place  below  the  gangway,  he  had  explained 
to  a  perplexed  House  of  Commons  why  he  had  left  Lord 
Palmerston's  ministry,  which  he  had  only  joined  about  a 
fortnight  earlier.  The  coincidence  was  a  useful  debating 
topic,  and  I  prepared  myself  for  speaking  if  I  found  an  oppor- 
tunity. I  rose  two  or  three  times  on  the  second  and  third 
nights  of  the  debate,  but  was  not  called  upon.  On  the 
fourth  and  last  night  the  same  thing  happened,  so  I  went 
to  the  Speaker  and  asked  if  he  thought  he  could  give  me 
an  opportunity  for  a  short  speech.  Mr.  Labouchere  had 
just  risen  and  was  speaking  on  the  Liberal  side.  The 
Speaker  (Mr.  Peel)  said  he  was  very  sorry  he  had  not  been 
able  to  call  me,  and  that  now  it  was  difficult,  for  he  had 
promised  Mr.  Forster  to  call  him  as  soon  as  he  could  after 
10  o'clock,  and  Labouchere  would  probably  speak  till  then. 
I  said  my  speech  would  be  very  short,  only  about  seven 
or  eight  minutes.  "  Oh/'  said  he,  "  that  makes  all  the 
difference.  I  shall  be  very  glad  to  have  a  speech  from 
the  Opposition  benches  if  I  am  sure  it  will  be  short."  So 
when  Labouchere  sat  down  I  was  called  upon.  It  was  a 
fine  opportunity,  for  the  House  was  rapidly  filling,  and  there 
was  much  excitement  at  the  prospect  of  a  close  division. 
The  speech  was  a  success.  Its  brevity  was  recognised  as 
an  excellent  quality,  and  perhaps  it  had  some  others. 

There  is  one  passage  I  think    it  worth  while  to  quote. 

Mr.  John  Morley  had  moved  the  following  amendment : 

That  the  House,  while  refraining  from  expressing  an 
opinion  on  the  policy  pursued  by  Her  Majesty's  Govern- 
ment in  respect  of  the  affairs  of  Egypt  and  the  Soudan, 
regrets  the  decision  of  Her  Majesty's  Government  to  employ 
the  forces  of  the  Crown  for  the  overthrow  of  the  power  of 
the  Mahdi. 

My  comment  on  this  was  : 

As  to  the  amendment  of  the  Member  for  Newcastle,  it 
is  a  sham  amendment.  He  knows  perfectly  well  the  sort  of 
people  among  whom  he  is  sitting.  He  knows  they  have  not 


238  AN   UNEXPECTED   CHECK  [CHAP,  xx 

the  courage  for  a  real  rebellion,  so  he  proposes  an  amend- 
ment, on  which  he  says,  "  We  will  refrain  from  expressing 
an  opinion  on  the  conduct  of  Her  Majesty's  Government." 
Why  does  he  refrain  from  expressing  that  opinion,  if  he  can 
express  an  opinion  in  favour  of  the  Government  ?  Sir, 
if  he  thought  there  were  fifty  members  of  this  House  who 
would  support  him  in  that  opinion,  he  would  be  delighted 
to  recognise  those  public  and  private  ties  of  which  he  spoke 
so  feelingly  on  Monday  last.  It  may  be  that  he  does  not 
himself  approve  of  the  conduct  of  the  Government ;  but  if 
he  does  not  approve  it,  why  does  he  not  say  so  ?  Because 
he  knows  the  sort  of  party  by  whom  he  is  surrounded.  The 
fact  is,  this  is  a  sham  amendment.  It  is  said,  and  I  believe 
with  some  truth,  that  the  intention  of  some  members  of 
the  Radical  section  is  to  vote  for  this  amendment,  which 
they  are  quite  sure  will  be  defeated,  and  then  to  vote  for 
the  Government  against  the  resolution  of  the  right  honour- 
able baronet — one  vote  for  their  consciences,  which  they 
take  care  shall  have  no  effect,  and  one  for  their  party  ;  so 
that  they  will  secure  the  continuance  in  power  of  a  Govern- 
ment which,  so  far  as  we  know,  is  committed  to  a  course 
of  wanton  and  objectless  bloodshed ;  and  having  by  their 
votes  made  it  possible  that  this  course  should  be  pursued, 
they  can  go  down  to  their  country  constituents  proudly 
claiming  to  be  the  friends  of  peace  and  freedom,  and  appeal 
for  their  justification  to  the  division  list  which  records 
their  votes  on  this  futile  amendment.1 

This  was  exactly  what  took  place. 

There  were  nearly  600  members  in  the  divisions.  Mr. 
Morley's  amendment  was  negatived  by  450  to  112.  Sir 
Stafford  Northcote's  motion  was  rejected  by  the  slender 
majority  of  14  (302-288),  Mr.  Forster  and  Mr.  Goschen 
voting  against  the  Government. 

For  a  few  days  it  was  uncertain  whether  the  Government 
would  resign.  There  had  been  an  understanding  in  the 
Cabinet  that  resignation  would  follow  if  their  majority  did 
not  exceed  fifteen,  but  Mr.  Gladstone  was  resolute  to  con- 
tinue the  struggle,  and  his  will  prevailed.  For  three  months 
he  fought  on  with  splendid  courage  and  resourcefulness. 

1  Selected  Speeclies,  p.  128. 


1885]  THE  GOVERNMENT  DEFEATED  239 

Difficulties  were  daily  increasing.  A  war  with  Russia  was 
at  the  last  moment  averted.  On  almost  all  political  ques- 
tions his  colleagues  were  sharply  divided,  and  it  taxed 
all  his  skill  to  prevent  the  resignations  which  were  daily 
threatened.  But  the  end  came  as  soon  as  Ministers  had  to 
decide  upon  their  Irish  policy.  The  question  of  the  renewal 
of  the  Coercion  Act  had  to  be  dealt  with  at  once,  and  was 
their  most  pressing  difficulty. 

I  was  in  my  place  in  the  House  on  the  occasion  when 
Mr.  Gladstone  gave  notice  that  the  Government  proposed  to 
continue  various  provisions  of  the  Crimes  Act  which  they 
deemed  to  be  valuable  and  equitable.  I  saw  Mr.  John 
Morley  at  once  leave  the  House,  and  in  a  few  minutes  he 
returned  and  read  from  a  written  notice  that  if  proposals 
were  made  for  the  renewal  of  exceptional  law  he  would 
move  their  rejection. 

This  notice  was  the  death-warrant  of  the  Government. 
Extraordinary  efforts  were  made  by  Mr.  Gladstone  to  secure 
agreement  in  the  Cabinet  upon  Irish  policy,  but  they  failed. 
The  end  came  somewhat  unexpectedly  on  June  8th.  An 
amendment  to  the  Budget  condemning  the  increase  of 
duties  on  beer  while  wine  was  left  untouched,  and  an  increase 
of  taxes  on  real  property  while  no  relief  was  given  to  rates, 
was  moved  on  that  evening  by  Sir  Michael  Hicks-Beach. 
The  debate  was  rather  dull,  and  there  was  no  great  excite- 
ment in  the  House.  Mr.  Gladstone,  closing  the  debate, 
made  a  strangely  vague  and  inconsecutive  speech,  which 
seemed  quite  needlessly  prolonged,  and  was  finished  with 
singular  abruptness.  I  was  sitting  just  opposite  to  him 
on  the  second  Opposition  bench,  and  I  noticed  that  the  chief 
Government  Whip,  Lord  Richard  Grosvenor,  came  into  the 
House  and  slipped  into  a  seat  close  to  him  and  said  some- 
thing to  him.  Thereupon  Mr.  Gladstone's  manner  suddenly 
changed,  and  he  snapped  out  his  closing  sentence  :  "  This  is 
a  question  of  life  and  death.  As  such  we  accept  it,  and  as 
such  we  do  not  envy  those  who,  if  they  gain  the  victory, 
will  have  to  bear  the  consequences/' 

Then  we  went  to  the  division,  and  as  I  joined  Hardinge 


240  AN   UNEXPECTED   CHECK  [CHAP,  xx 

Giffard  and  walked  down  the  House  I  said,  "  We  are  going 
to  beat  them  to-night/' 

"  Oh  no/'  said  he ;  "we  know  the  numbers  in  the  House, 
and  there  are  not  quite  enough  of  us." 

I  told  him  what  I  had  noticed,  and  that  I  felt  sure  that 
Lord  Richard  had  told  his  chief  that  we  should  win. 

"  Then,"  said  Giffard,  "  you  and  I  will  be  in  office  together 
in  a  fortnight,"  and  we  went  on  to  the  Lobby. 

When  the  paper  was  handed  to  our  Whip  there  was  a 
tremendous  shout,  sharply  checked  for  the  numbers  to  be 
heard.  For  the  Government,  252  ;  for  the  Opposition,  264. 
Then  came  the  shouting  again.  Randolph  Churchill  jumped 
up  on  the  seat  and  waved  his  hat  in  triumph.  And  the 
loudest  cheering  came  from  the  Irish  Nationalists.  Mr. 
Gladstone  amid  the  storm  had  taken  a  writing-pad  on  his 
knee,  and  was  writing  his  letter  to  the  Queen. 

It  was  an  arranged  defeat.  Lord  Spencer  had  come  over 
from  Ireland  that  morning,  and  for  nearly  two  hours  that 
afternoon  the  Cabinet  had  been  struggling  in  vain  to  find  a 
solution  of  their  difficulties.  There  were  enough  of  their 
followers  in  the  House  to  have  given  them  a  majority,  but 
to  some  twenty-five  of  them  a  hint  was  given  that  they 
need  not  come  back  after  dinner,  and  Lord  Richard 
Grosvenor's  whisper  reported  that  a  defeat  had  been  secured. 

The  faithful  Liberals  who  had  assisted  the  Government 
to  commit  the  happy  dispatch  were  very  scurvily  treated. 
The  Pall  Mall  Gazette  printed  a  "  black  list  "  of  sixty-one 
who  were  absent  from  the  division,  with  such  excuses  as 
some  of  them  chose  to  give,  and  The  Daily  News  fell  upon 
them  furiously.  It  was  only  a  few  months  later  that  a 
Liberal  Whip  (R.  W.  Duff),  speaking  at  Banff,  let  out  the 
true  story. 

The  resignation  of  the  Ministry  was  announced  next  day, 
but  the  Queen  was  at  Balmoral ;  personal  interviews  were 
necessary  ;  and  Her  Majesty  determined  to  return  to  town, 
but  did  not  arrive  in  London  until  June  lyth.  Meanwhile 
speculation  had  been  busy  with  the  question  whether  Lord 
Salisbury  would  accept  office,  and  with  the  appointments 


1885]  THE  NEW  LAW  OFFICERS  241 

likely  to  be  made  if  he  should  do  so.  As  early  as  June  loth 
The  Daily  Telegraph  mentioned  me  as  the  new  Attorney- 
General,  and  the  same  forecast  was  given  in  The  Daily  News 
of  the  following  day.  The  first  announcement  in  The  Times 
that  a  new  Ministry  had  been  formed  appeared  on  the 
i8th,  and  gave  the  names  of  the  Cabinet,  and  added,  "  It 
is  rumoured  with  considerable  confidence  that  Mr.  Edward 
Clarke  and  Mr.  Gorst  will  be  the  new  Law  Officers."  The 
announcement  of  my  appointment  was  repeated  in  The 
Pall  Mall  Gazette  that  evening.  The  next  day  a  new  name 
was  introduced.  On  the  i8th  Sir  Hardinge  Giffard  had 
returned  his  briefs,  and  Richard  Webster  had  gone  to 
Launceston  to  arrange  his  candidature  for  the  seat  thus 
to  be  vacated. 

And  on  the  iQth  the  Press  Association  circulated  the 
statement  that  Webster  was  to  be  Attorney-General  and 
Gorst  Solicitor. 

But  for  ten  days  longer  the  matter  remained  in  doubt. 
Macnaghten  expected,  with  good  reason,  that  he  would 
be  Attorney-General.  He  was  senior  to  both  Webster  and 
myself ;  he  had  a  large  practice  and  a  safe  seat.  I  did 
not  know  until  many  years  later  that  he  had  been  offered 
a  judgeship  by  the  Liberals  and  had  refused  it  at  the  request 
of  his  party  leaders. 

While  the  legal  appointments  were  still  unsettled  Giffard 
came  to  Macnaghten  and  asked  him  to  accept  the  Home 
Secretaryship,  promising  him  the  reversion  to  the  Chancel- 
lorship. But  Macnaghten  had  many  children,  and  he  did 
not  think  the  promise  was  quite  certain  of  fulfilment,  so  he 
refused  and  remained  in  the  House  of  Commons  until  in 
1887  he  was  appointed  a  Lord  of  Appeal.  His  doubt  was 
prudent ;  twenty  years  later  Lord  Halsbury  was  still  the 
Lord  Chancellor  of  a  Unionist  Government. 

The  uncertainty  continued,  and  meanwhile  the  Plymouth 
Liberals  had  a  crowded  meeting  at  their  club  on  the  2oth 
to  make  preparation  for  a  contest  in  the  event  of  my 
appointment.  My  friends  there  were  naturally  uneasy, 
and  pressed  me  for  information.  I  had  none  to  give,  and 


242  AN   UNEXPECTED   CHECK  [CHAP,  xx 

had  no  communication  with  our  Whips  or  with  any  of  our 
leaders.  I  believed  I  was  entitled  to  office,  but  I  did  not 
mean  to  ask  for  it. 

For  another  week  no  definite  appointments  were  made, 
and  in  the  complete  list  of  the  new  Government  which 
appeared  in  The  Times  and  The  Pall  Mall  Gazette  on  June  26th 
the  names  of  Webster  and  Gorst  were  given  as  the  Law 
Officers,  but  a  note  of  interrogation  was  appended  to  each. 
On  that  day  I  wrote  to  Lord  Salisbury,  saying  that  Webster's 
appointment  would  be  a  public  affront  to  all  the  Queen's 
Counsel  on  our  side  of  the  House  of  Commons,  and  that 
it  would  result  in  the  disaffection  of  supporters  of  the  Con- 
servative cause  now  in  the  House,  and  it  would  be  a  severe 
blow  to  the  interests  of  the  party  at  the  General  Election. 

By  the  same  post  I  sent  a  copy  of  the  letter  to  Webster. 
Lord  Salisbury  sent  me  a  very  friendly  answer,  defending  his 
action  and  saying  in  its  closing  sentence  : 

I  much  regret  that  these  considerations  under  the  par- 
ticular circumstances  of  the  case  have  not  allowed  me  to 
ask  for  your  official  aid  as  yet.  But  you  have  a  long  future 
before  you,  and  under  any  political  circumstances  you 
cannot  have  long  to  wait. 

My  friendship  with  Webster  did  not  moult  a  feather.  He 
was  a  man  of  high  and  generous  nature,  and  to  the  end  of 
his  life  our  close  and  intimate  friendship  remained  undis- 
turbed. I  have  reason  to  believe  that  Lord  Salisbury  per- 
sisted to  the  last  in  wishing  to  appoint  me  Solicitor-General. 
He  wished  Gorst  to  have  departmental  office,  and  the 
Under-Secretaryship  of  the  Home  Office  was  kept  open  for 
him.  But  Lord  Randolph  insisted  on  his  having  the  more 
valuable  appointment,  and  on  June  2gth  The  Times  defi- 
nitely announced  that  Webster  and  he  were  the  Law  Officers, 
and  that  evening  The  Pall  Mall  Gazette  reported  a  new 
appointment — that  of  Mr.  Stuart-Wortley  as  Under- Secre- 
tary for  the  Home  Department. 

I  have  dwelt  upon  these  details,  for  this  was  the  most 
important  incident  in  my  public  life.  For  the  first  time 


1885]  A  SERIOUS  DISAPPOINTMENT  243 

my  junior  was  preferred  before  me.  And  there  he  always 
remained,  blocking  my  way. 

But  for  his  action  I  should  have  been  Attorney-General 
in  1897  ;  but  for  him  I  believe  I  should  have  been  Lord 
Chief  Justice  in  1900.  Any  feeling  of  soreness  has  long 
passed  away.  As  I  said  in  my  farewell  speech  to  the  Bar, 
I  have  no  reproaches  and  no  regrets.  My  life  has  been 
too  prosperous  and  too  happy  for  them  to  be  possible.  But 
I  saw  at  the  time  what  the  consequences  might  be,  and  I 
seriously  resented  what  I  felt  to  be  a  public  affront. 

Of  course  my  personal  disappointment  could  not  affect 
my  political  allegiance.  My  admiration  and  regard  for 
Lord  Salisbury  and  my  devotion  to  Tory  principles  were 
quite  unimpaired,  but  my  connection  with  the  party  organ- 
isation was  severed  at  once.  I  resigned  my  seat  on  the  Council 
of  the  National  Union,  on  which  I  had  served  for  eighteen 
years,  and  although  the  Council  passed  a  resolution  urging 
me  to  withdraw  the  resignation  I  refused  to  do  so. 

The  most  important  consequence  to  me  of  that  incident 
was  that  it  seriously  weakened  my  political  position  at 
Plymouth  and  my  expectation  of  an  easy  victory  at  the 
General  Election,  which  we  knew  would  come  in  November. 

If  I  had  been  appointed,  I  have  no  doubt  that  I  should 
have  been  returned  without  a  contest.  The  Liberals  had 
no  candidate  ;  the  time  would  have  been  too  short  to  find 
and  introduce  a  new  one.  Many  in  their  own  ranks  would 
have  thought  it  ungenerous  to  oppose  me  ;  and  if  a  candi- 
date had  been  ready  he  would  have  been  reluctant  to 
fight  an  unpromising  contest  at  the  end  of  June,  with  the 
certainty  of  having  to  fight  again  four  or  five  months  later. 

But  my  exclusion  from  office  was  made  use  of  by  my 
opponents  and  disappointed  and  disturbed  my  supporters. 
The  idea  was  put  about  that  either  my  seat  was  known  to 
be  very  unsafe  (and  a  doubt  was  suggested  by  The  Daily 
News)  or  that  there  was  something  against  me  which  dis- 
inclined my  leaders  to  give  me  oifice.  And  when  I  went 
to  Plymouth  I  found  a  perceptible  lessening  of  confidence 
among  my  best  friends. 


244  AN   UNEXPECTED   CHECK  [CHAP,  xx 

The  stop-gap  Ministry  stumbled  through  the  rest  of  the 
session,  and  in  October  Parliament  was  dissolved. 

My  retirement  from  the  National  Union  did  not  lessen 
my  platform  activity,  and  during  the  month  of  October  I 
was  very  busy  in  the  west  of  England.  Beginning  with 
the  meeting  of  the  Plymouth  Conservative  Association  on 
October  7th,  I  spoke  in  that  month  at  Liskeard,  Penzance 
(twice),  Plympton,  Torquay,  and  St.  Austell,  and  during  the 
Plymouth  election  I  found  time  for  meetings  at  Devonport 
and  Ivybridge,  and  for  a  Tavistock  Division  meeting  at 
Plymouth. 

Our  own  contest  began  with  the  issue  of  election  addresses 
by  Sir  Edward  Bates  and  myself.  My  old  friend  Edward 
Pinches  went  down  with  me  as  our  election  agent,  and 
but  for  his  ability  and  tact  and  absolute  devotion  to  my 
interests  the  struggle  might  have  ended  in  my  defeat.  As  it 
was  I  could  not  help  seeing  that  our  opponents  seemed  to 
gain  in  confidence  day  by  day,  and  in  certain  wards  of  the 
town  our  friends  confessed  themselves  uneasy.  The  polling 
day,  November  24th,  was  a  day  of  very  hard  work  and 
much  anxiety.  With  some  difficulty  I  persuaded  Sir  Edward 
Bates  to  adopt  my  practice  and  start  driving  about  the 
town  from  one  committee-room  to  another  as  soon  as  the 
poll  was  opened  at  8  o'clock,  and  this  we  continued  until 
four  in  the  afternoon.  Then  he  was  tired  and  had  to  rest. 
I  was  tired  too,  and  my  head  was  aching  badly,  but  1  set 
off  on  another  round. 

At  each  committee-room  I  examined  the  returns  and  had 
slips  made  out  with  the  names  of  voters  who  had  promised 
to  support  us  and  were  not  known  to  have  voted,  and 
pressing  many  friends  into  the  service  sent  off  each  with 
one  name,  charging  him  not  to  rest  until  he  had  brought 
that  voter  to  the  poll. 

This  tinal  effort  arranged  for,  there  was  nothing  more  1 
could  do,  and  I  went  back  to  my  hotel  for  a  few  hours  of 
quiet.  The  poll  closed  at  eight,  but  there  were  8,500 
votes  to  be  counted  ;  250  ballot  papers  had  to  be  submitted 
to  the  Mayor's  decision,  and  an  incident  which  occurred 


1885]  A  NARROW  VICTORY  245 

during  the  counting  caused  Mr.  Pinches  to  be  very  strictly 
observant.  The  ballot  papers,  when  examined,  were  tied 
up  in  bundles  of  fifty,  and  he  noticed  one  bundle  lying  on 
a  form  by  one  of  the  Liberal  counters.  It  was  a  bundle 
of  votes  given  for  me,  but,  whether  by  accident  or  design, 
a  vote  for  another  candidate  was  put  at  the  top  of  the 
bundle,  and  the  effect  would  have  been  to  make  a  differ- 
ence of  a  hundred  in  our  respective  numbers  when  the 
returning  officer  obtained  the  result  by  counting  the 
bundles. 

Just  after  midnight  the  poll  was  declared  :  Bates,  4,354  ; 
Clarke,  4,240  ;  Macliver,  4,132  ;  and  Brett  (afterwards  the 
2nd  Viscount  Esher),  3,968  ;  and  in  returning  thanks  from 
the  window  of  the  Globe  Hotel  I  was  able  to  announce  that 
at  Devonport  both  Conservatives  had  been  returned,  and 
that  Henry  Northcote  had  been  re-elected  for  Exeter. 

It  was  a  narrow  victory,  and  the  effort  had  been  almost 
too  much  for  me.  My  wife  had  been  at  Plymouth  helping 
me  throughout  the  contest,  and  the  next  morning  she 
brought  me  back  to  London  by  an  early  train  in  very 
poor  condition.  We  went  at  once  to  my  old  friend  Sir 
Richard  Quain,  and  he  sent  me  down  to  Hastings,  with 
directions  like  those  which  Sir  William  Jenner  had  given 
me  in  1880.  It  was  difficult  to  obey  them  for  a  few  days, 
for  Hastings  was  in  election  turmoil ;  the  principal  hotels 
were  full,  and  at  the  Albion  I  was  wakened  from  much 
needed  sleep  by  the  brass  band  and  the  shouting  of  Mr. 
Inderwick's  supporters,  who  passed  in  procession  beneath 
my  bedroom  window.  Three  weeks  passed  before  my  dear 
wife's  affectionate  care  had  brought  me  back  to  health 
and  enabled  me  to  resume  my  work  in  town,  and  to  ex- 
change condolences  with  my  political  friends  on  the  defec- 
tion of  the  counties,  which  destroyed  the  hopes  excited 
by  the  successes  of  the  first  few  days  of  the  elections,  and 
made  it  clear  that  the  Conservative  Ministry  could  not 
continue  in  office. 


CHAPTER   XXI 

THE   BARTLETT   CASE  I   l886 

THE  early  months  of  1886  were  a  time  of  violent  political 
unrest.  An  amendment  to  the  Address  to  the  Crown 
placed  Mr.  Gladstone  again  in  office ;  but  there  was  mis- 
understanding as  to  the  terms  on  which  the  Radical  leader 
entered  the  Cabinet.  Lord  Hartington  would  not  join ; 
Sir  Henry  James  refused  the  Woolsack ;  and  before  the 
new  Government  was  eight  weeks  old  Mr.  Chamberlain 
resigned,  and  it  became  almost  certain  that  Lord  Salisbury's 
forecast  would  be  justified — that,  short  as  his  Government 
had  been,  this  would  be  shorter  still. 

Unhappily  for  the  country  Mr.  Gladstone's  courage  pre- 
vailed over  his  prudence,  and  on  April  8th  the  first  Home 
Rule  Bill  was  introduced.  I  was  at  the  House  very  little 
during  that  debate,  which  lasted  for  five  nights,  for  I  was 
busily  preparing  for  the  trial  of  a  case  which  has  always 
made  me  rejoice  that  I  was  not  made  Solicitor-General  in 
1885.  Six  months  of  the  dignity  and  emolument  of  that 
office  would  have  been  dearly  purchased  if  it  had  prevented 
me  from  defending  Adelaide  Bartlett;  and  I  had  made  up 
my  mind  that,  contrary  to  the  practice  of  those  who 
had  recently  held  legal  office,  I  would  not,  while  a  law 
officer  of  the  Crown,  appear  for  the  prisoner  in  a  criminal 
case. 

In  the  year  1875  Adelaide  Blanche  de  la  Tremouille,  a 
girl  of  nineteen  years  of  age,  the  unacknowledged  daughter 
of  an  Englishman  of  good  social  position,  was  married  at 
Croydon  to  Thomas  Edwin  Bartlett,  a  grocer  in  business 
at  Lmlwich,  eleven  years  her  senior. 

246 


i886]  GEORGE  DYSOti  247 

It  was  a  strange  union.  The  girl  had  spent  her  youth 
at  a  French  boarding  school,  from  which  she  was  brought 
to  England  to  be  married  to  a  man  whom  she  only  saw 
once  before  the  day  of  the  wedding ;  and  it  was  arranged 
that  the  marriage  should  be  only  a  form,  that  she  should 
go  to  a  convent  school  at  Brussels  for  eighteen  months  to 
complete  her  education,  and  that  she  should  then  return 
to  her  husband,  and  be  to  him  a  companion  and  nothing 
more.  They  lived  together  on  this  footing  for  six  years, 
and  then  at  her  desire — for  her  life  was  lonely,  and  she 
longed  to  have  a  child — the  agreement  was  broken  and  she 
became  pregnant.  But  the  child  was  still-born,  and  the 
old  relations  were  resumed.  In  1885  Mr.  Bartlett' s  busi- 
ness had  prospered,  and  other  shops  had  been  bought,  and 
they  were  residing  in  a  private  house  at  Wimbledon.  There 
they  made  the  acquaintance  of  a  good-looking  young  Wes- 
leyan  minister,  the  Rev.  George  Dyson,  who  was  put  in 
charge  of  the  chapel  at  Merton  which  they  were  in  the 
habit  of  attending.  It  was  not  long  before  he  made  love 
to  Mrs.  Bartlett  and  found  her  entirely  responsive.  He 
mentioned  their  mutual  affection  to  the  husband,  and,  so 
far  from  meeting  any  objection,  found  him  quite  willing 
to  permit  and  even  to  encourage  the  intimacy.  His  visits 
became  more  frequent ;  he  called  her  Adelaide  and  habitu- 
ally kissed  her  in  her  husband's  presence ;  she  visited  him 
at  his  lodgings,  and  they  used  to  go  for  walks  together. 

Mr.  Bartlett  gave  her  to  him ;  spoke  of  the  time  when, 
after  his  death,  they  would  come  together ;  and  in  Sep- 
tember altered  the  will  he  had  made,  which  left  his  wife 
the  enjoyment  of  his  property  so  long  as  she  did  not  marry 
again,  by  removing  that  restriction  and  appointing  the 
prospective  husband  sole  executor. 

In  December  Mr.  Bartlett  was  ill,  and  was  told  that  the 
disease  from  which  he  suffered  was  making  progress,  and 
that  necrosis  of  the  jaw  had  set  in. 

On  Sunday  night,  December  27th,  Mrs.  Bartlett  went 
out  with  Mr.  Dyson  to  post  some  letters,  and  during  their 
walk  gave  him  a  sovereign  and  asked  him  to  procure  some 


24«  THE  BARTLETT  CASE  [CHA*.  xxi 

chloroform  for  her.  The  next  day  he  went  to  three  dif- 
ferent chemists  in  Putney  and  Wimbledon,  and  obtained 
from  each  a  bottle  of  pure  chloroform,  saying  in  each  case 
that  he  had  been  down  in  the  country  at  Poole,  and  had 
got  some  grease  stains  on  his  coat,  which  he  wished  to  re- 
move. He  thus  obtained  three  bottles,  containing  together 
about  five  ounces,  and  poured  their  contents  into  a  large 
bottle.  On  the  Tuesday  afternoon  he  went  to  Claverton 
Street,  Pimlico,  where  the  Bartletts  were  then  lodging. 
Mrs.  Bartlett  went  for  a  walk  with  him  on  the  Embankment, 
and  in  the  course  of  the  walk  he  gave  her  the  chloroform. 
On  the  Thursday  night,  New  Year's  Eve,  some  coals  were 
taken  up  to  the  Bartletts'  bedroom,  and  Mrs.  Bartlett  told 
the  servant  she  would  not  be  wanted  again.  About  four 
o'clock  she  aroused  the  household.  Mr.  Bartlett  was  dead. 
The  doctor,  who  was  promptly  called,  believed  from  the 
temperature  of  the  body  that  he  had  been  dead  for  three 
hours. 

Mrs.  Bartlett  told  the  doctor  that  she  went  to  sleep  at 
the  foot  of  her  husband's  bed  in  the  easy  chair  in  which  of 
late  she  had  been  sleeping,  and  had  her  left  arm  round 
his  feet,  that  she  woke  and  heard  him  snoring,  a  peculiar 
kind  of  snore,  and  dropped  asleep  again.  Later  on  she 
awoke  and  saw  him  lying  on  his  face  in  an  uncomfortable 
position.  He  was  dead,  and  the  body  was  already  cold. 
No  mention  was  then  made  of  chloroform,  and  no  bottle 
containing  any  was  found  in  the  room.  Mrs.  Bartlett 
wrote  to  Mr.  Dyson  that  morning  a  letter  which  he  subse- 
quently destroyed,  which  he  said  asked  him  to  come  to 
see  her  on  the  following  day,  the  Saturday.  He  came,  and 
was  in  the  house  while  the  post-mortem  examination  was 
being  made,  and  learned  that  the  doctors  had  failed  to 
discover  the  cause  of  death,  and  that  the  rooms  were  to  be 
locked  and  sealed  and  handed  over  to  the  coroner.  The 
next  morning  he  went  to  preach  at  his  chapel,  and  as  he  was 
crossing  Wandsworth  Common  he  threw  away  the  bottles 
which  had  contained  the  chloroform  he  purchased.  Mrs. 
Bartlett  still  had  in  her  secret  possession  the  larger  bottle 


1886]  STUDIES  IN   MEDICAL  SCIENCE  249 

which  he  had  given  to  her,  and  four  days  later,  when  she 
was  going  by  train  from  Victoria  to  Peckham  Rye,  she 
poured  the  chloroform  on  the  rails  and  threw  the  bottle 
into  a  pond. 

The  trial  began  on  Monday,  April  I2th,  1886,  at  the 
Central  Criminal  Court  and  lasted  all  the  week.  Sir  Alfred 
Wills  was  the  judge,  and  Sir  Charles  Russell,  as  Attorney- 
General,  led  for  the  prosecution,  his  juniors  being  Mr.  Poland, 
Mr.  R.  S.  Wright  (afterwards  Mr.  Justice  Wright),  and 
Mr.  Moloney. 

The  coroner's  jury  had  found  a  verdict  of  wilful  murder 
against  both  Mrs.  Bartlett  and  Mr.  Dyson,  and  they  had 
both  been  committed  for  trial  on  that  charge.  I  was  re- 
tained to  defend  her,  with  Mr.  Mead  and  Mr.  Edward  Beal 
for  my  juniors,  and  Frank  Lockwood  and  Mr.  (now  Sir) 
C.  Mathews  were  Counsel  for  Dyson. 

It  was  evident  that,  as  in  the  Penge  case,  questions  of 
medical  science  would  be  of  supreme  importance,  so  I  post- 
poned some  cases  and  returned  other  briefs,  and  spent  a 
week  or  ten  days  in  studying  at  the  British  Museum  or  in 
my  own  library  all  that  was  known  about  the  qualities  and 
effects  of  chloroform  and  the  methods  of  its  administration. 

During  the  week  of  the  trial  I  read  nothing  but  the 
papers  in  the  case  and  the  medical  books.  I  drove  down 
to  the  Old  Bailey  every  morning,  and  when  the  Court  rose 
in  the  afternoon  drove  straight  back  to  Russell  Square  ; 
then  went  for  an  hour's  walk  round  the  Regent's  Park  or 
up  to  Hampstead  or  Highgate;  and  then,  after  a  light 
dinner,  spent  the  evening  in  preparing  the  cross-examina- 
tion or  speech  for  the  following  day. 

I  cannot  give  space  here  for  a  full  account  of  the  trial. 
Soon  after  its  close  I  published  a  full  report,  the  medical 
evidence  being  carefully  edited.  Sir  Charles  Russell  cor- 
rected the  proofs  of  his  speech,  and  Sir  Alfred  Wills  those 
of  his  summing  up,  and  I  believe  the  volume  to  be  the 
most  complete  report  of  an  English  murder  trial,  and  to 
doctors  as  well  as  lawyers  one  of  the  most  useful.1 
1  The  Trial  of  Adelaide  Bartlett,  Stevens  &  Haynes. 


250  THE  BARTLETT  CASE  [CHAP,  xxi 

It  began  with  a  remarkable  incident.  At  the  sitting 
of  the  Court  on  the  Monday  morning  an  application  was 
made  by  the  counsel  for  Dyson,  and  was  supported  by 
me,  that  the  two  prisoners  should  be  tried  separately,  a 
course  the  propriety  of  which  was  at  once  admitted  by  the 
judge  and  the  Attorney-General. 

But  Sir  Charles  Russell  then  made  the  unexpected  an- 
nouncement that  the  Crown  did  not  intend  to  proceed  with 
the  charge  against  Dyson,  but  proposed  to  call  him  as  a 
witness  against  Mrs.  Bartlett.  A  verdict  of  "  Not  guilty  " 
was  then  taken  in  his  case,  and  he  was  released  from 
custody. 

The  next  day  he  appeared  in  the  witness-box.  He  told 
in  detail  the  history  which  I  have  just  given  in  outline  of 
his  acquaintance  with  the  Bartletts,  and  of  the  strange 
relations  which  had  grown  up  between  him  and  both  of 
them.  I  need  hardly  say  that  the  task  of  cross-examining 
him  was  one  of  the  most  delicate  and  difficult  I  ever  had. 
Quite  as  important  was  the  cross-examination  of  the  five 
medical  witnesses,  chief  among  whom  were  Dr.  Stevenson, 
who  had  been  the  principal  scientific  witness  in  the  Penge 
case  nine  years  before,  and  Dr.  Meymott  Tidy. 

They  were  perhaps  the  greatest  living  authorities  upon 
the  qualities  of  chloroform  and  the  methods  and  effect  of 
its  administration.  I  cross-examined  Dr.  Stevenson  at 
great  length,  and  at  the  end  had  made  so  much  progress 
that  I  ventured  to  put  to  him  this  question  : 

Now,  suppose  you  had  to  deal  with  a  sleeping  man, 
and  it  was  your  object  to  get  down  his  throat,  without  his 
knowing  it,  a  liquid  the  administration  of  which  to  the  lips 
or  throat  would  cause  great  pain,  do  you  not  agree  it  would 
be  a  very  difficult  or  delicate  operation  ? 

A.  I  think  it  would  be  an  operation  which  would  often 
fail,  and  might  often  succeed. 

Q.  Would  you  look  on  it  as  a  delicate  operation  ? 

A.  I  should  look  on  it  as  a  delicate  operation  because  I 
should  be  afraid  of  pouring  it  down  the  windpipe. 

Q.  That  is  one  of  the  dangers  you  contemplate  ? 


1886]  A   CROSS-EXAMINATION  251 

A.  Yes. 

Q.  If  it  got  into  the  windpipe,  there  would  be  spasmodic 
action  of  the  muscles,  would  there  not  ? 

A.  At  the  stage  when  you  had  come  to  the  conclusion 
that  you  could  do  it,  when  there  is  insensibility  or  partial 
insensibility,  the  rejection  of  the  liquid  by  the  windpipe 
would  be  probably  less  active  than  when  the  patient  was 
awake. 

Q.  If  the  patient  got  into  such  a  state  of  insensibility 
as  not  to  reject  it,  it  would  go  down  his  windpipe  and  burn 
that? 

A.  Probably  some  might  go  down  his  windpipe. 

Q.  It  would  probably  do  so  ? 

A.  Probably. 

Q.  If  it  did  so,  it  would  leave  its  traces  ? 

A.  I  should  expect  to  find  traces  after  death  unless 
the  patient  lived  some  hours. 

Q.  Of  course  a  great  many  post-mortem  appearances  are 
changed  if  the  patient  lives  some  hours. 

A.  Yes. 

Q.  Not  only  by  the  chloroform  disappearing,  so  to  speak, 
but  also  other  changes  incidental  to  a  post-mortem  condition. 

A.  Yes. 

Q.  And  if  the  post-mortem  examination  had  been  per- 
formed, as  Mrs.  Bartlett  wished  it  to  be,  on  the  very  day 
on  which  death  took  place,  there  would  have  been  still 
better  opportunity  of  determining  the  cause  of  death  ? 

A.  Yes. 

I  have  always  thought  that  these  questions  and  answers 
were  the  turning-point  of  the  case. 

I  do  not  think  any  one  who  has  not  been  through  it  him- 
self can  realise  the  mental  strain  of  the  last  day  of  a  trial 
for  murder  upon  the  counsel  for  the  defence.  As  he  listens 
to  the  reply  for  the  Crown  and  to  the  judge's  summing  up, 
he  finds  little  comfort  in  the  thought  that  he  has  done  his 
best,  and  that  the  responsibility  for  the  result  lies  not  so 
much  with  him  as  with  the  judge  and  the  jury.  He  hears 
the  arguments  he  has  pressed  most  strongly  answered  in 
the  reply,  perhaps  ignored  or  made  light  of  in  the  summing 
up,  and  he  cannot  help  feeling  that  there  may  have  been 


252  THE  BARTLETT  CASE  [CHAP,  xxi 

some  failure  on  his  part  of  clearness  or  of  force,  and  that 
an  adverse  verdict  and  the  inevitable  sentence  may  pos- 
sibly be  the  consequence  of  that  failure. 

The  week  was  to  me  one  of  very  great  strain.  I  made 
a  point  of  being  at  my  place  in  court  every  morning  before 
the  judge  came  in,  so  that  when  the  fragile,  pale  little 
woman  came  up  the  prison  stairs  to  take  her  place  in  the 
dock  she  should  see  in  the  crowded  court  at  least  one 
friendly  face.  One  morning  she  sent  me  a  pathetic  little 
note  : 

MONSIEUR, — I  am  very  grateful  to  you,  although  I  do 
not  look  at  you. 

As  the  days  went  on  public  excitement  grew;  and  on 
Saturday  morning  there  were  restless  crowds  in  the  Old 
Bailey,  and  the  quiet  tones  of  the  judge  were  sometimes 
disturbed  by  the  tumult  outside. 

On  the  Saturday  I  sat  for  five  hours  listening  to  Sir 
Charles  Russell  and  Mr.  Justice  Wills,  recognising  the 
strength  of  the  one  and  the  scrupulous  fairness  of  the  other, 
yet  quite  unable  to  free  my  mind  from  the  apprehension 
that  the  life  of  Adelaide  Bartlett  might  be  in  the  greater 
peril  through  some  defect  of  mine.  Then  when  the  sum- 
ming up  was  over  there  were  two  hours  of  tense  anxiety. 

A  little  before  3  o'clock  the  jury  went  out  to  consider 
their  verdict.  An  hour  passed  slowly.  Then  they  came 
back ;  but  not  to  give  a  verdict,  but  to  ask  a  question 
which  seemed  almost  trivial.  They  wanted  to  know  what 
time  the  people  of  the  house  went  to  bed  on  the  night  that 
Mr.  Bartlett  died.  The  question  was  answered;  and  we 
were  left  to  guess  on  which  side  of  the  balance  of  their 
judgement  the  answer  would  weigh.  The  crowded  court 
rustled,  and  sighed,  and  talked  in  nervous  and  excited  whis- 
pers for  another  hour,  and  then  they  came  again,  and  the 
prisoner,  deadly  pale  but  strangely  calm,  was  brought  back 
to  the  dock  to  hear  her  fate. 

But  instead  of  giving  a  direct  answer  to  the  question, 


1886]  NOT    GUILTY  253 

"  Do  you  find  the  prisoner,  Adelaide  Bartlett,  guilty  or 
not  guilty  ?  "   the  foreman  reads  from  a  paper : 

We  have  considered  the  evidence,  and,  although  we 
think  grave  suspicion  is  attached  to  the  prisoner,  we  do 
not  think  there  is  sufficient  evidence  to  show  how  or  by 
whom  the  chloroform  was  administered. 

"  Then  you  say  the  prisoner  is  not  guilty  ?  " 

"  Not  guilty." 

Before  these  formal  words  were  spoken  the  sound  of 
cheering  in  the  streets  made  it  difficult  to  hear  them,  and 
then  the  cheering  was  taken  up  in  court,  and  for  several 
minutes  the  angry  remonstrance  of  the  judge  could  not  be 
heard. 

For  the  first  and  the  only  time  in  my  fifty  years  of  advo- 
cacy the  suspense,  and  emotion  as  I  saw  my  client  go  from 
the  dock  to  freedom  broke  me  down.  I  found  myself 
sobbing  ;  I  dropped  my  head  on  the  desk  before  me,  and 
some  minutes  passed  before  I  regained  my  self-control. 
Then  came  the  hour  of  triumph.  When  I  had  unrobed  and 
came  down  to  the  courtyard,  I  found  the  jury  waiting  at 
the  foot  of  the  steps  to  shake  hands  with  me  and  to 
congratulate.  When  the  gates  were  opened  to  let  my 
brougham  out,  a  cheering  crowd  came  round  me  and  ran 
beside  it,  shouting,  up  the  Old  Bailey  and  along  Holborn, 
while  the  passers-by  on  foot,  or  on  the  omnibuses,  took 
up  the  cry. 

I  went  to  the  Lyceum  that  night  to  see  Henry  Irving 
and  Ellen  Terry  in  Faust,  and  I  was  cheered  when  I  entered 
the  theatre. 

The  results  of  a  conspicuous  success  such  as  this  do 
not  show  themselves  in  professional  advancement  only :  my 
name  had  become  more  widely  known  than  ever  before, 
and  I  felt  the  assistance  of  this  during  all  the  political 
activities  of  this  eventful  year. 

I  was  soon  busy  with  platform  work.  An  assurance  had 
been  given  to  Lord  Hartington  that,  in  the  event  of  the 
rejection  of  the  Home  Rule  Bill  and  a  consequent  appeal 


254  THE  BARTLETT  CASE  [CHAP,  xxi 

to  the  constituencies,  the  leaders  of  the  Tory  party  would 
use  all  their  authority  to  secure  the  re-election  of  any 
Liberal  member  who  voted  against  the  Bill.  I  think  I  was 
one  of  the  first  persons  authorised  to  declare  that  policy. 
Among  the  Liberal  members  in  the  West  of  England  there 
were  many  whose  party  loyalty  was  given  rather  to  Lord 
Hartington  than  to  Mr.  Gladstone,  and  a  meeting  was 
arranged  at  Plymouth  for  April  2gth,  when  I  urged  the 
strict  adherence  to  this  pledge  of  support.  I  said: 

So  long  as  the  question  before  the  country  is  a  clear 
and  distinct  issue  of  the  maintenance  or  overthrow  of  the 
unimpaired  authority  of  the  Imperial  Parliament,  so  long 
I  will  gladly  go  upon  the  platform  to  speak  for  any  Liberal 
who  has  had  the  courage  to  imperil  his  whole  political  career 
by  taking  up  a  course  of  patriotic  duty.1 

In  May  came  the  decisive  debate  and  division.  In  the 
debate  I  followed  Henry  Campbell-Bannerman.  Its  issue 
was  uncertain  until  almost  the  last  hour,  but  when  the 
division  was  taken  ninety-two  Liberals  voted  with  the 
Opposition,  and  the  Bill  was  rejected  by  a  majority  of 
thirty. 

The  expected  dissolution  followed,  and  I  of  course 
became  very  busy.  We  had  little  trouble  at  Plymouth. 
The  Radicals  were  determined  to  fight,  but  they  had  much 
difficulty  in  finding  candidates,  and  eventually  found  a 
very  poor  pair — a  respectable  baronet  from  Somersetshire, 
and  a  Liverpool  linen-draper  who  had  become  a  barrister, 
not  nearly  so  respectable.  Both  Mr.  Parnell  and  Lord 
Hartington  thought  it  worth  while  to  come  down  and  speak 
at  Plymouth.  We  lost  two  or  three  hundred  Roman 
Catholic  votes,  but  this  was  far  more  than  counterbalanced 
by  the  body  of  moderate  Liberals  who  under  the  leadership 
of  Mr.  John  Shelly  obeyed  Lord  Hartington's  directions, 
and  came  over  to  the  Unionist  camp. 

We  only  had  one  election  meeting  at  Plymouth,  but  I 
was  busy  every  evening  speaking  in  one  of  the  neighbour- 

1  Public  Speeches,  1880-90,  p.  103. 


i886]  SOLICITOR-GENERAL  255 

ing  constituencies,  generally  in  support  of  a  Liberal  mem- 
ber who  had  voted  with  us  and  for  whom  we  wanted  to 
secure  full  Conservative  support.  Our  own  polling  brought 
us  a  remarkable  victory.  The  majority  of  108  nine  months 
before  now  became  a  majority  of  882,  and  this  time  I 
headed  my  colleague  by  a  few  votes,  and  so  became  senior 
member  for  Plymouth.  The  numbers  were  :  Clarke,  4,137  ; 
Bates,  4,133  ;  Stephens,  3,255  ;  and  Strachey,  3,175. 

I  came  at  once  to  town,  but  as  soon  as  the  election  tur- 
moil was  over  went  quietly  back  to  my  work  in  the  Courts. 
I  had  taken  for  a  few  weeks  a  pleasant  house  at  Staines, 
the  vicarage  of  the  then  undivided  parish;  and  when  the 
sweeping  Unionist  victory  brought  Lord  Salisbury  back 
to  office,  and  discussions  began  again  as  to  appointments  in 
the  new  Ministry,  I  carefully  absented  myself  from  the 
political  clubs.  But  this  time  I  was  not  passed  over. 
Randolph  Churchill  was  to  be  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer 
and  to  lead  the  House  of  Commons,  and  he  said  he  would 
not  do  this  if  I  were  sitting  behind  him  as  a  private  mem- 
ber. So  it  was  arranged  that  Gorst  should  take  political 
office.  I  went  down  to  Staines  on  the  evening  of  August  2nd, 
and  as  I  was  walking  to  the  vicarage  my  wife  met  me  with 
a  letter  from  Lord  Salisbury. 

20,  ARLINGTON  STREET, 

August  2nd,  1886. 

DEAR  MR.  CLARKE, 

Sir  John  Gorst  has  intimated  his  preference  for  a 
political  career,  and  has  accepted  political  office. 

Under  these  circumstances  I  naturally  turn  to  you  in  the 
hope  that  you  will  accept  the  office  of  Solicitor-General 
in  the  Government  which  I  am  forming.  We  shall  be 
very  glad  of  the  assistance  of  your  great  parliamentary 
powers  in  the  hard  battle  which  lies  before  us. 

Believe  me, 

Yours  very  truly, 

SALISBURY. 

It  was  a  satisfaction  to  me  when  I  met  Lord  Randolph 
to  hear  him  say,  "  Why,  wherever  have  you  been,  Clarke  ? 
We  did  not  know  what  had  become  of  you." 


256  THE  BARTLETT  CASE  [CHAP,  xxi 

I  went  down  to  Plymouth  for  re-election,  and  was 
returned  unopposed.  It  was  my  sixth  election  in  six  years 
and  a  half,  and  the  first  which  was  uncon tested. 

The  election  was  declared  at  2  o'clock ;  I  caught  the 
train  at  eight  minutes  past,  dressed  in  the  railway  carriage, 
and  went  straight  to  the  Mansion  House,  where  the  Lord 
Mayor  was  that  night  entertaining  the  new  Ministers. 
When  I  entered  the  Egyptian  Hall,  Lord  Salisbury  was 
speaking,  and  was  interrupted  by  a  burst  of  cheering. 
"  What  is  it  ?  "  he  asked  of  his  neighbour.  "  Your  new 
Solicitor/' 

A  very  pleasant  incident  came  a  little  later  which  may 
fitly  close  this  chapter.  The  Mayor  of  Plymouth,  Mr. 
William  Algar,  was  a  Liberal,  but  he  immediately  suggested 
that  all  political  parties  should  join  in  giving  me  a  public 
dinner  of  congratulation  on  my  appointment.  The  sug- 
gestion was  very  cordially  accepted,  and  on  October  iQth 
300  of  the  leading  townsmen  sat  down  to  dinner  in  the 
fine  Guildhall ;  my  wife  and  a  crowd  of  ladies  looked  down 
from  the  gallery ;  and  my  heart  filled  with  pride  and  grati- 
tude when  I  felt  I  had  achieved  one  of  the  ambitions  of  my 
life,  and  that  in  securing  the  unstinted  confidence  of  my 
political  friends  I  had  not  forfeited  the  personal  goodwill 
of  my  keenest  opponents. 


CHAPTER   XXII 

SOLICITOR-GENERAL  :    1886-1890 

I  THINK  I  cannot  do  better  than  begin  this  chapter  by 
quoting  a  few  sentences  from  my  speech  at  the  dinner 
which  I  have  just  described. 

Mr.  Mayor,  the  office  to  which  I  have  been  appointed  is 
not  in  itself  an  essentially  political  office.  Its  duties  are 
very  varied  and  are  very  important.  The  Law  Officers  have 
to  advise  the  Government  of  the  day  upon  the  interpreta- 
tion of  treaties ;  they  have  to  advise  upon  the  Acts  which 
regulate  the  powers  and  authority  of  municipal  bodies  and 
bodies  of  local  government  in  this  country.  They  are 
constantly  consulted  with  regard  to  the  rights  of  British 
subjects  in  foreign  lands,  and  the  rights  of  foreign  subjects 
who  come  within  our  territories.  In  Parliament  their 
action  is  not  of  a  distinctly  political  kind.  It  is  their  duty 
to  advise  the  Government  of  the  day  with  regard  to  all 
measures  which  deal  with  the  administration  or  the  im- 
provement of  the  law,  and  to  take  charge  and  conduct  of 
these  measures  in  the  House  of  Commons.  It  is  their 
duty  to  acquaint  themselves  with  all  the  proposals  that 
are  made  by  private  members  in  the  House,  and  to  advise 
the  Government  with  regard  to  the  effect  of  those  Bills 
upon  the  law  and  as  to  their  compatibility  with  the  system 
of  legislation  and  the  policy  which  has  been  adopted.  And 
I  am  very  glad  to  believe  that  in  Parliament  my  work  will 
be  but  little  connected  with  the  controversies  of  political 
parties.  Unfortunately,  for  years  past,  measures  which 
involve  no  party  questions  at  all  have  been  Ipst  and  have 
gone  to  pieces  on  the  shoals  and  quicksands  of  the  diffi- 
culties of  parliamentary  life.  There  they  remain — pro- 
posed sometimes  by  one  party,  sometimes  by  another, 
but  never  carried  into  effect ;  and  it  is  my  hope — as  I 

«57 


258  SOLICITOR-GENERAL  [CHAP, 

know  it  is  the  hope  of  my  friend  and  colleague,  the  Attorney- 
General — that  we  may  be  able  to  rescue  some  of  those 
proposals  from  the  disasters  which  have  befallen  them, 
and  to  carry  into  effect  some  useful  measures  for  the  ad- 
vantage of  the  country. 

There  is  another  duty  which  falls  on  the  Solicitor-General, 
along  with  the  Attorney-General.  They  are  the  leaders  of 
the  Bar. 

It  is  a  proud  position,  and  it  involves  great  responsibility. 
They  have  the  right  to  assert  for  the  Bar,  and  with  all 
respect  to  defend  and  insist  upon,  the  right  of  the  Bar  to 
fair  and  courteous  audience  on  the  part  of  the  judges ; 
and,  on  the  other  hand,  it  falls  upon  them,  as  one  of  their 
great  duties,  that  they  shall  in  their  own  conduct  set  an 
example  to  the  Bar  which  they  have  the  honour  to  lead 
• — that  they  shall  show  by  their  own  act  and  deed  that  it 
is  possible,  as  I  am  sure  it  is,  to  combine  the  most  zealous 
and  industrious  advocacy  as  an  advocate  at  the  Bar 
with  the  most  scrupulous  and  delicate  sense  of  honour 
that  ever  was  felt  by  an  English  gentleman.  Sir,  these 
are  great  duties  and  great  responsibilities,  and  I  am  glad 
indeed  to  be  strengthened  in  undertaking  them  and  in 
advancing  on  that  work  by  the  sympathy  and  support 
of  the  brilliant  gathering  of  Plymouth  men  who  are  met 
now  within  this  hall. 

I  should  be  untrue  to  myself,  and  I  should  be  untrue  to 
those  who  have  trusted  me  and  honour  me  to-night,  if  I 
did  not  look  upon  this  appointment  which  I  have  received 
rather  as  a  means  of  doing  public  service  than  as  a  mere 
gratification  of  individual  ambition.  Of  course  it  is  the 
gratification  of  ambition.  No  man  could  have  worked  as 
I  have  worked  since  I  came  to  the  Bar  and  not  feel  what 
I  will  not  say  is  pardonable — for  I  will  not  think  it  needs 
to  be  pardoned — but  will  not  feel  a  personal  gratification 
in  attaining  to  the  position  which  has  been  given  to  me. 
But  I  hope  and  believe  that  I  prize  that  position  chiefly 
because  it  takes  me  away,  as  it  were,  from  the  mere  work- 
ing for  myself,  to  a  position  which  may  give  me  the  oppor- 
tunity of  doing  something  which  may  be  valuable  to  my 
profession  and  valuable  to  my  fellow-countrymen. 

And  if  I  were  to  neglect  any  opportunity  of  doing  public 
service,  I  should  be  not  only  untrue  to  my  own  ideal  and 
untrue  to  that  opinion  which  you  have  formed  of  me,  but 


1886-90]  LAW  OFFICE  259 

I  should  be  most  ungrateful  to  that  Providence  which 
has  pursued  my  course  since  I  was  called  to  the  Bar 
with  unexpected  and  unlooked-for  opportunities  of  success, 
which  have  not  been  given  to  others  as  worthy  of  such 
opportunities  as  I  myself  could  possibly  have  been.  It  is 
in  that  spirit  and  with  those  hopes  that  I  have  accepted 
the  office  of  Solicitor,  and  that  I  receive  the  kind  and 
generous  compliment  which  you  pay  to  me  to-night. 

For  six  years — a  longer  period  of  office  than  any  former 
Solicitor-General  had  enjoyed — I  had  to  perform  these 
varied  duties ;  and  I  have  often  wondered  how  my  colleague 
and  I  were  able  to  continue  so  long  the  heavy  work  which 
during  those  anxious  years  was  thrown  upon  us.  At  that 
time  the  Law  Officers  were  allowed  to  take  private  prac- 
tice, but  it  was  of  course  necessary  for  me  to  take  some 
means  of  reducing  this,  which  in  my  case  had  risen  to 
£9,500  a  year,  in  order  to  prevent  its  interference  with 
official  work.  So  I  made  a  rule  that  in  future  I  would  not 
take  any  brief  with  a  smaller  fee  than  one  hundred  guineas, 
which  might  be,  if  the  client  desired,  a  brief  fee  of  fifty  and 
a  special  fee  of  the  same  amount. 

This  rule  saved  so  much  trouble  that  when  I  left  office 
I  still  continued  it,  so  that  for  twenty-eight  out  of  my  fifty 
years  at  the  Bar  my  minimum  fee  was  one  hundred  guineas. 
My  average  income  for  the  six  years  was  £17,500,  of  which 
£6,000  was  the  official  salary,  while  the  fees  for  Govern- 
ment cases  averaged  about  £3,000. 

My  relations  with  my  legal  colleague  were  very  pleasant. 
Webster  was  a  man  of  extraordinary  industry  ;  his  patience 
and  courtesy  never  failed,  and  his  business-like  methods 
lightened  the  burden  of  our  very  heavy  work. 

Our  private  practice  was  never  allowed  to  interfere  with 
our  work  as  Law  Officers,  and  for  regulating  that  work  he 
established  a  practical  and  satisfactory  system.  No  Law 
Officers'  Department  then  existed,  but  a  very  capable  clerk, 
who  afterwards  became  the  Chief  Permanent  Clerk  of  that 
Department,  was  engaged,  and  his  salary  was  paid  in  equal 
shares  by  my  colleague  and  myself.  He  kept  a  register  of 


SOLICITOR-GENERAL  [CHAP,  xxn 

all  the  papers  sent  to  the  Law  Officers  for  their  opinion  in 
non-contentious  cases,  which  amounted  to  several  hundreds 
in  the  course  of  the  year.  The  papers  being  received  and 
the  date  registered,  they  were  sent  alternately  to  the 
Attorney  and  the  Solicitor.  When  the  opinion  was  written, 
it  was  sent  to  Mr.  Abbs,  and  he,  noting  the  date  of  return, 
passed  it  on  to  the  other  Law  Officer.  If  he  concurred  in 
the  opinion  he  added  his  signature,  and  it  passed  again 
through  the  hands  of  Mr.  Abbs  to  the  proper  department, 
the  date  of  its  delivery  being  duly  registered.  If  the 
matter  required  discussion  we  met  at  the  Attorney-General's 
room  at  the  Law  Courts  or  the  House  of  Commons.  I  have 
no  record  by  me,  but  I  think  there  were  scarcely  any  cases 
during  our  six  years  of  office  in  which,  however  important 
the  question,  the  papers  remained  in  our  hands  for  more 
than  a  fortnight.  It  is  interesting  to  remember  that  the 
case  upon  which  we  spent  more  time  than  upon  any  other 
was  a  proposal  by  the  German  Government  to  establish 
in  foreign  countries  consular  protectorates,  and  to  give 
to  the  tribunal  of  the  protectorate  jurisdiction  over  persons 
of  whatever  nationality  residing  in  the  area  of  the  Consu- 
late. The  proposal  was  of  course  rejected  by  the  English 
Government. 

I  think  that  during  our  time  of  office  there  was  hardly 
a  single  case  on  which,  after  discussion,  we  were  not  able 
to  write  a  joint  opinion  ;  and  as  far  as  I  remember  the  only 
question  on  which  we  found  it  impossible  to  agree  was 
whether  the  expression  "  the  coloured  races  "  did  or  did  not 
include  the  Japanese.  I  held  that  it  did. 

Our  first  official  consultation  was  an  interesting  one: 
it  concerned  the  case  of  Sir  Charles  Dilke. 

At  the  first  hearing  of  the  Crawford  divorce  case  Sir 
Charles,  the  co-respondent,  either  because  he  and  his  coun- 
sel, Sir  Charles  Russell,  knew  that  the  charge  against  him 
was  true,  or  in  consequence  of  bad  advice  from  Sir  Henry 
James  and  Mr.  Chamberlain,  did  not  tender  himself  as  a 
witness.  And  because  there  was  no  sufficient  corrobora- 
tion  of  the  confession  of  Mrs.  Crawford,  the  strange  result 


1886-90]  SIR   CHARLES    DILKE  261 

was  that  the  jury  found  that  she  had  committed  adultery 
with  Sir  Charles  Dilke  and  that  he  had  not  committed 
adultery  with  her.  To  the  public  mind  the  fact  that  Sir 
Charles  did  not  deny  the  charge  appeared  to  be  an  admis- 
sion of  its  truth.  The  immediate  consequences  to  him, 
political  and  social,  were  exactly  the  same  as  if  he  had 
given  evidence  and  not  been  believed.  His  advisers,  curi- 
ously enough,  did  not  seem  to  have  foreseen  this,  and, 
Russell  having  become  Attorney-General,  an  attempt  was 
made  to  rehabilitate  Sir  Charles  Dilke  by  an  intervention 
of  the  Queen's  Proctor,  alleging  that  the  verdict  was  con- 
trary to  the  justice  of  the  case,  and  that  it  was  obtained 
by  the  suppression  of  material  facts.  Of  this  second  alle- 
gation there  was  very  little  evidence.  At  the  second  trial 
Sir  Charles  Dilke  was  the  first  witness  called,  and  he  gave 
an  entire  denial  to  the  charge  of  adultery,  but  after  listen- 
ing to  witnesses  on  both  sides  for  several  days  the  jury 
without  hesitation  found  that  the  previous  verdict  was 
not  contrary  to  the  justice  of  the  case.  Then  it  was  sug- 
gested that  Sir  Charles  Dilke  should  be  indicted  for  perjury. 
At  such  a  trial  he  could  not  give  evidence,  and  so  would  be 
saved  from  cross-examination,  while  the  fact  that  he  had 
already  denied  the  charge  against  him  on  oath  would  be 
strongly  pressed  in  his  favour,  and  indeed  was  the  very 
foundation  of  the  criminal  proceedings,  and  the  jury 
would  be  told  to  give  him  the  benefit  of  any  reasonable 
doubt.  It  was  very  unlikely  that  a  jury  would  agree  to 
convict. 

Sir  Charles  Dilke  had  written  to  Webster,  and  this  was 
the  first  case  on  which  we  consulted.  Of  course  we  refused 
to  go  on  with  a  sham  prosecution  instituted  with  the  desire 
and  intention  that  it  should  fail. 

Our  early  years  of  office  were  very  laborious.  The  par- 
liamentary session  of  1887  was  the  longest  continuous  session 
that  had  been  known  for  fifty  years.  There  were  130 
evening  sittings,  and  the  House  sat  280  hours  after  mid- 
night, so  that  the  average  time  of  rising  during  the  whole 
session  was  about  a  quarter  past  two  in  the  morning. 
18 


262  SOLICITOR-GENERAL  [CHAP,  xxn 

These  late  hours  were  more  trying  to  Webster  than  to 
me,  for  our  habits  of  work  had  been  different.  He  had 
been  used  to  go  to  bed  quite  early,  to  rise  at  five  or  six, 
to  make  his  coffee  and  go  to  work,  and  spend  a  couple  of 
hours  with  his  papers  before  going  out  for  his  morning 
exercise.  My  habit,  on  the  other  hand,  was  never  to  go  to 
bed  until  I  was  absolutely  ready  for  the  work  to  be  done 
in  court  on  the  following  day.  I  have  often  stayed  up 
working  until  three  or  four  in  the  morning,  and  then  slept 
until  the  last  moment  which  made  it  possible  for  me  to  be 
punctual  at  consultation  or  in  court.  I  used  to  find  that 
the  facts  and  arguments  I  had  been  considering  at  night 
arranged  themselves  in  the  mind  in  the  hours  of  sleep. 

The  nearest  approach  I  had  to  a  personal  difference 
with  Webster  during  our  six  years  of  office  was  when  he 
appointed  a  consultation  for  half -past  eight  in  the  morning 
and  I  flatly  refused  to  attend  it. 

The  years  from  1886  to  1892  were  singularly  free  from 
foreign  troubles.  But  I  remember  three  occasions  on  each 
of  which  there  was  a  short  period  of  acute  anxiety.  One 
day  a  message  came  from  the  admiral  commanding  on  the 
Pacific  station,  saying  that  he  had  news  that  an  English 
fishing  vessel  had  been  seized  for  some  alleged  violation 
of  treaty  rights  by  an  American  ship  of  war,  and  that  he 
was  starting  to  endeavour  to  intercept  the  vessels,  resolved 
to  free  the  captured  vessel  by  force  if  necessary.  Another 
time  a  fugitive  accused  of  crime  had  taken  shelter  in  the 
house  of  our  consul  at  Tunis,  and  the  French  authorities 
demanded  his  surrender  and  threatened  to  take  him  by 
force.  On  the  third  occasion  a  war  with  Portugal  was 
still  more  narrowly  averted.  I  do  not  recollect  the  exact 
reason  of  the  quarrel.  There  had  been  difficulties  about 
certain  oyster  fisheries,  and  I  remember  the  papers  being 
sent  to  the  Law  Officers  for  advice.  On  one  paper  was 
endorsed  in  red  in  Lord  Salisbury's  very  clear  handwriting : 

We  may  have  to  go  to  war  with  Portugal,  but  it  will  not 
be  about  oyster-shells.  S. 


1886-90]  THE   MINISTRY    IN   DANGER  263 

But  whatever  the  cause  we  came  to  the  very  verge  of 
war.  Arrangements  were  made  by  which  in  a  few  days 
all  the  colonial  possessions  of  Portugal  would  have  been 
seized.  Admiral  Fremantle  was  in  command  on  the  coast 
of  East  Africa.  Ships  were  summoned  from  other  stations 
to  meet  him,  and  he  was  instructed  that  at  a  certain  date 
his  force  should  be  assembled  and  the  orders  issued  for 
immediate  action. 

It  was  only  on  the  very  morning  of  the  appointed  day 
that  he  received  a  message  that  Portugal  had  given  way. 
The  relations  between  the  two  countries  were  for  some  years 
strained  and  formal,  and  it  was  not  until  1893,  when 
Sir  James  Fergusson  was  sent  on  a  friendly  visit  to  Lisbon, 
that  the  customary  presence  of  a  British  ship  in  the  Tagus 
was  resumed. 

Before  the  Government  had  been  six  months  in  office 
an  event  happened  which  for  a  few  weeks  made  it  seem 
very  likely  that  we  should  prove  to  be  what  our  opponents 
had  tauntingly  called  us — a  mere  "  Ministry  of  caretakers/' 
Lord  Randolph  Churchill,  who  during  the  short  autumn 
session  of  1886  had  led  the  House  of  Commons  with  re- 
markable and  quite  unexpected  tact  and  dignity,  was  not 
content  with  having  ousted  Sir  Stafford  Northcote  from 
the  leadership  of  the  House.  There  were  yet  two  powerful 
members  of  "  the  old  gang  "  (to  use  his  own  phrase,  which 
has  often  proved  useful  since)  to  be  got  rid  of — Mr.  Smith 
and  Lord  George  Hamilton — and  his  sudden  resignation  two 
days  before  Christmas  compelled  Lord  Salisbury  to  make 
immediate  choice  between  his  powerful  new  lieutenant  and 
two  of  his  most  faithful  and  experienced  colleagues.  The 
Prime  Minister  did  not  hesitate.  He  gave  no  room  for 
discussion,  and  simply  accepted  the  resignation. 

For  a  time  it  looked  as  if  the  Government  must  fall. 
Lord  Salisbury  evidently  thought  it  in  extreme  danger, 
for  he  made  the  strange  offer  to  Lord  Hartington  to  make 
way  for  him  and  serve  in  a  Cabinet  of  which  Lord  Harting- 
ton should  be  the  head. 

The  offer  cannot  have  been  made  with  any  expectation, 


264  SOLICITOR-GENERAL  [CHAP,  xxn 

certainly  not  with  any  desire,  that  it  should  be  accepted. 
There  had  been  sharper  personal  conflict  between  Mr. 
Chamberlain  and  Lord  Hartington  than  between  either 
of  them  and  their  former  chief ;  it  was  the  clash  of  their 
irreconcilable  opinions  that  had  broken  up  the  Liberal 
Government  in  1885  ;  and  if  Lord  Hartington,  with  Lord 
Northbrook  and  Lord  Lansdowne,  who  were  included  in 
the  invitation,  had  become  leading  members  of  the  Ministry, 
Mr.  Chamberlain  and  all  that  strong  body  of  Radical 
opinion  which  he  represented  would  at  once  have  found  a 
way  of  returning  to  the  fold  they  had  quitted.  How  great 
the  danger  was  very  quickly  appeared. 

On  the  very  day  that  Lord  Randolph's  resignation  was 
announced  Mr.  Chamberlain  made  overtures  for  reunion, 
which  were  promptly  accepted,  and  a  little  later  Mr.  Cham- 
berlain and  Sir  William  Harcourt,  Mr.  George  Trevelyan 
and  Mr.  Morley,  met  at  the  Round  Table  Conference.  Cham- 
berlain submitted  to  them  his  plan  of  National  Councils 
at  Dublin  and  Belfast,  or  preferably  one  Council  at  Dublin, 
with  large  powers  of  administration  and  certain  limited 
powers  of  legislation,  subject  to  the  approval,  tacit  or 
expressed,  of  the  English  Parliament. 

The  reason  that  conference  failed  was  the  subject  of 
voluminous  and  quite  unintelligible  explanations  by  every- 
body concerned.  Whether  the  effective  cause  was  a  violent 
article  in  The  Baptist  by  Mr.  Chamberlain,  or  a  refusal  by 
Mr.  Gladstone  to  sanction  the  continuance  of  the  discus- 
sion, will  never  be  known — probably  both  contributed  to 
the  very  definite  result,  which  was  an  absolute  and  final 
abandonment  of  every  attempt  at  reconciliation.  From 
that  time  to  the  end  of  the  Parliament  more  than  five  years 
later,  although  the  Whig  and  Radical  leaders  never  ceased 
to  display  on  public  platforms  their  differences  with  regard 
to  English  politics,  the  whole  body  of  their  followers  were 
the  loyal  and  steady  supporters  of  the  Ministry  in  its  firm 
enforcement  of  resolute  government  in  Ireland. 

And  for  several  years  Ireland  occupied  practically  the 
whole  time  of  Parliament.  It  was  not  without  some  strange 


1886-90]  PARNELLISM    AND    CRIME  265 

departures  from  the  customary  practice  of  the  House  of 
Commons  that  after  long  struggle  the  Government  suc- 
ceeded in  passing  a  Crimes  Bill  of  exceptional  stringency. 
They  were  helped  by  the  behaviour,  always  violent  and 
sometimes  disreputable,  of  the  Nationalist  members,  which 
outraged  the  opinion  of  the  country  and  irritated  the 
patience  of  the  House. 

In  these  Irish  debates  Webster  and  I  took  an  active 
share. 

I  think  that  the  day  on  which  I  rendered  my  greatest 
service  to  the  Conservative  party,  excepting  perhaps  my 
speech  on  the  second  Home  Rule  Bill  in  1893,  was  May  4th, 
1887. 

Two  months  earlier  The  Times  had  commenced  the  pub- 
lication of  a  series  of  articles  on  "  Parnellism  and  Crime/1 
which  were  intended  to  show  that  Parnell  and  his  associates 
were  directly  responsible  for  the  murder  and  outrage  which 
had  made  it  impossible  to  govern  Ireland  by  any  ordinary 
law.  For  a  time  no  specific  charge  was  made  against  the 
Irish  leader ;  but  on  April  i8th,  the  day  of  the  division  on 
the  second  reading  of  the  Crimes  Bill,  there  appeared  in 
The  Times  what  purported  to  be  a  facsimile  of  a  letter 
written  by  Parnell  in  1882,  in  which  he  made  a  sort  of 
apology  for  having  condemned  the  Phoenix  Park  murders, 
and  said  that,  while  he  regretted  that  Lord  Frederick 
Cavendish  had  been  accidentally  killed,  he  admitted  that 
Burke  got  no  more  than  his  deserts. 

Parnell  spoke  that  night  just  before  the  end  of  the  debate 
and  declared  the  letter  to  be  a  fabrication.  But  the 
strange  way  in  which  he  dealt  with  it  made  most  of  his 
hearers  believe  that  directly  or  indirectly  he  was  responsible 
for  the  document.  He  drew  a  sharp  distinction  between 
the  letter  which  was  on  the  first  page  of  the  notepaper, 
and  which  was  not  suggested  to  be  in  his  handwriting,  and 
the  few  words,  "  Yours  very  truly,  Charles  S.  Parnell," 
which  were  at  the  top  of  the  fourth  page,  and  which  were 
alleged  to  have  been  written  by  him.  As  to  these  few 
words  he  said  the  signature  was  unlike  his,  and  curiously 


266  SOLICITOR-GENERAL  [CHAP,  xxn 

enough  pointed  to  its  free  and  flowing  character  as  evidence 
that  it  was  a  forgery.  As  to  the  letter  he  said,  "  I  certainly 
never  heard  of  the  letter.  I  never  directed  such  a  letter 
to  be  written.  I  never  saw  such  a  letter  before  I  saw  it 
in  The  Times:'  He  said,  "  When  I  heard  of  the  letter  I 
supposed  that  some  autograph  of  mine  had  fallen  into  the 
hands  of  some  person  for  whom  it  had  not  been  intended, 
and  that  it  had  been  made  use  of  in  this  way.  I  supposed 
that  some  blank  sheet  containing  my  signature,  such  as 
many  members  who  are  asked  for  their  signatures  fre- 
quently send — I  supposed  that  such  a  blank  sheet  had 
fallen  into  hands  for  which  it  had  not  been  intended,  and 
that  it  had  been  misused  in  this  fashion,  or  that  something 
of  this  kind  had  happened/' 

The  House  sat  amazed.  The  Irish  member  (Mr.  Har- 
rington) who  had  called  Parnell's  attention  to  the  matter 
was  nearly  right  in  thinking  that  if  that  was  the  way  his 
leader  was  going  to  deal  with  the  matter  in  the  House 
there  was  not  an  Englishman  who  would  not  believe  that 
he  wrote  the  letter.1  I  remember  the  remarkable  scene, 
the  strained  silence  while  this  curious  speech  was  made; 
and  I  know  the  almost  universal  belief  was  that  he  had 
suggested  the  true  explanation,  and  that  a  genuine  signa- 
ture had,  with  or  without  his  knowledge  and  consent,  been 
used  for  the  purpose  of  giving  authority  to  the  letter. 

This  belief  deepened  as  time  went  on,  and  the  Irish 
leader  took  no  step  to  vindicate  himself.  He  brought  no 
action,  he  instituted  no  prosecution,  he  made  no  claim  in 
the  House  for  an  investigation  by  which  his  character 
might  be  cleared.  It  is  only  fair  to  him  that  it  should  be 
remembered  that  his  inaction  was  in  great  measure  due  to 
the  urgent  and  persistent  advice  of  Mr.  Morley  and  Sir 
Charles  Russell  and  a  third  member  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons, with  whom  he  took  counsel.  But,  by  whomsoever 
prompted,  his  conduct  was  generally  taken  as  confirming 
the  opinion  which  had  been  suggested  by  his  speech  in  the 
House  of  Commons,  and  it  was  not  until  fifteen  months 
1  Lift  of  Charles  Stewart  Parnell,  O'Brien,  ch.  ii,  p.  199. 


1886-90]  A   DIFFICULT    SITUATION  267 

afterwards,  in  circumstances  hereafter  to  be  noted,  that  the 
question  of  his  responsibility  for  this  letter  was  reopened. 

But  a  fortnight  later,  through  the  indiscretion  of  one  of 
its  own  supporters,  the  Government  was  suddenly  brought 
into  a  position  of  difficulty,  and  even  of  some  danger. 
There  sat  in  the  House  Sir  Charles  Lewis,  a  dull,  well- 
meaning  old  solicitor,  one  of  the  steady,  silent  voters  dear 
to  parliamentary  whips,  one  of  the  last  men  from  whom 
any  inconvenient  independent  action  could  be  feared.  A 
couple  of  months  earlier  he,  for  long  service  rendered  to 
the  party  in  electioneering  matters,  had  been  made  a 
baronet,  and  the  hereditary  dignity  probably  disturbed  his 
judgement,  for  on  May  2nd,  seeing  in  an  article  of  The  Times 
a  statement  that  Mr.  Dillon,  speaking  in  the  House  of 
Commons,  had  untruly  charged  The  Times  with  falsehood, 
he  resolved  to  bring  the  matter  before  the  House  by  charg- 
ing the  editor  of  The  Times  with  a  breach  of  privilege. 

He  wrote  to  the  Speaker,  intimating  his  intention.  He 
wrote  also  to  the  Leader  of  the  House,  and  Mr.  Smith  at 
once  wrote  back,  begging  him  to  do  nothing  of  the  kind. 
But  it  was  too  late.  He  had  written  at  the  same  time  to 
Mr.  Dillon.  So  on  Tuesday,  May  3rd,  at  the  beginning  of 
the  sitting,  as  a  matter  of  privilege  and  without  public 
notice,  he  called  attention  to  The  Times  article  and  asked 
that  it  be  read  by  the  clerk  at  the  table.  This  was  done, 
and  the  next  step,  if  the  House  agreed  that  a  breach  of 
privilege  had  been  committed,  would  be  to  order  the  printer 
of  The  Times,  the  article  being  anonymous,  to  attend  at 
the  Bar  of  the  House  to  receive  sentence.  The  position 
was  embarrassing. 

Our  supporters  were  not  present  in  full  strength  ;  it  was 
from  an  old  member  on  our  own  side  that  the  proposal 
came,  and  the  result  of  a  division  was  not  quite  certain. 

Mr.  Smith  moved  the  adjournment  of  the  discussion  until 
the  Thursday.  This  Gladstone  violently  resisted,  and  a 
majority  of  39  in  favour  of  an  adjournment  was  only 
secured  by  agreeing  that  the  debate  should  be  continued 
the  next  afternoon. 


268  SOLICITOR-GENERAL  [CHAP,  xxn 

I  had  spoken  after  Mr.  Gladstone  in  this  debate  on  the 
adjournment.  Webster  and  I  advised  the  Government 
that  the  article  did  not  constitute  a  breach  of  privilege, 
and  I  was  commissioned  to  propose  an  amendment  in  that 
sense  when  the  debate  was  resumed  at  noon  the  following 
day.  The  House  did  not  rise  until  after  two  in  the  morn- 
ing, and  from  5  o'clock  until  then  I  was  at  work  in  the 
Library,  examining  precedents  and  previous  debates.  Be- 
fore I  left  the  House  I  finished  my  preparation,  but  I  did 
not  get  much  time  for  sleep  that  night,  as  I  had  a  good  deal 
of  work  to  do  after  I  got  home,  having  next  morning  to 
open  a  heavy  case  of  alleged  fraud  in  the  promotion  of  a 
public  company,  which  took  Mr.  Justice  Grove  and  a  special 
jury  six  days  to  try. 

I  opened  my  case  and  hurried  down  to  the  House.  It 
was  a  little  before  noon  when  I  got  there,  and  as  I  went 
in  I  met  Mr.  Akers-Douglas.  Said  he,  "  The  Ministers  are 
at  Smith's  room  ;  I  think  they  mean  to  give  way."  I 
asked  to  be  allowed  to  go  in,  and  I  was  admitted,  and  Mr. 
Smith  told  me  they  had  decided  not  to  resist  the  motion 
and  to  consent  to  the  appointment  of  a  Select  Committee. 
I  said  that  of  course  I  had  no  right  to  give  an  opinion,  but 
I  hoped  they  would  let  me  say  a  word  or  two  before  they 
finally  decided.  I  do  not  remember  all  the  Ministers  who 
were  present,  but  certainly  Mr.  Goschen,  Lord  George 
Hamilton,  and  Lord  John  Manners  were  among  them. 
They  invited  me  to  speak,  and  I  said  a  good  many  words 
in  a  very  short  time.  I  pointed  out  what  would  inevitably 
happen :  that  the  first  witness  called  would  be  the  editor 
of  The  Times  ;  that  he  would  be  called  upon  to  state  the 
names  of  his  contributors  and  his  informants  ;  that  ques- 
tions would  be  asked  which  he  certainly  would  refuse  to 
answer ;  that  every  such  refusal  and  every  controversy 
arising  in  the  Committee  would  at  once  be  brought  up  in 
the  House  and  be  discussed  as  a  matter  of  privilege.  I 
urged  that  no  unanimous  report  could  ever  be  expected, 
and  that  the  whole  work  of  the  session  would  be  broken 
up.  To  my  great  delight  they  gave  way,  revoked  their 


i886-go]          THE   END    OF   A    BUSY    DAY  269 

decision,  and  sent  me  into  the  House  to  move  the  amend- 
ment, which  was  eventually  carried  by  317  to  233. 

A  curious  little  incident  occurred  after  I  went  into  the 
House. 

Lord  Randolph  Churchill  used  to  sit  at  the  end  of  the 
second  bench  above  the  gangway,  and  Ministers  were  ner- 
vously anxious  not  to  offend  him,  so  they  showed  him  the 
terms  of  my  amendment,  which  declared  that  the  article 
in  The  Times  was  not  a  breach  of  privilege.  He  said  he 
would  not  support  it  in  that  form,  so  it  was  altered  at  the 
very  moment  I  rose  to  speak  into  a  statement  that  the 
House  declined  to  treat  it  as  a  breach  of  privilege. 

The  House  rose  at  6  o'clock,  and  an  hour  later  I  was  at 
Willis's  Rooms  at  the  dinner  of  the  Royal  Literary  Fund, 
where  Lord  Lytton  was  presiding,  and  there  I  proposed 
the  toast  of  the  Literature  of  the  United  Kingdom,  to 
which  Professor  Mahaffy  responded. 

So,  taking  all  things  together,  a  good  deal  of  work  was 
crowded  into  about  thirty  hours.  And  I  feel  quite  certain 
now  that,  if  that  proposal  for  a  Select  Committee  had  been 
carried  out,  the  Ministry  would  not  have  survived  the 
session. 

In  my  speech,  with  of  course  specific  instructions  from 
Ministers  to  do  so,  I  repeated  an  offer  made  by  the  leader 
of  the  House — that  if  Mr.  Dillon  would  move  for  a  prosecu- 
tion of  The  Times  for  libel  to  be  instituted  that  motion 
should  be  accepted,  and,  although  the  Attorney-General 
must  nominally  be  associated  with  the  prosecution,  the 
whole  conduct  of  the  proceedings  should  be  left  to  such 
persons  as  he  might  nominate,  the  counsel  who  would 
appear  in  court  and  the  solicitors  who  would  prepare  the 
case  for  trial. 

The  refusal  of  this  offer  deepened  the  general  conviction 
that  Parnell  and  his  associates  had  good  reason  for  dread- 
ing any  public  investigation. 

With  this  debate  and  division  any  anxiety  as  to  the 
continuance  of  the  Government  passed  away,  and  it  became 
clear  that  but  for  some  unexpected  accident  they  would 


270  SOLICITOR-GENERAL  [CHAP,  xxn 

remain  in  office  until  the  end  of  that  Parliament.  By 
the  end  of  June  the  Crimes  Bill  had  passed  through  the 
House  of  Commons,  and  Mr.  Balfour  had  in  his  hand  the 
power  which  he  firmly  and  courageously  used,  and  which 
at  once  began  to  take  effect  in  restoring  peace  and  order 
to  the  sorely  disturbed  parts  of  Ireland. 

A  month  or  two  later  an  Act  was  passed  for  amending, 
and  in  some  respects  extending,  the  Act  of  1881,  especially 
by  the  admission  of  leaseholders  to  its  benefits,  and  by 
provision  for  the  reopening  and  revision  of  judicial  rents. 
It  could  not  be  denied  that  this  was  the  acceptance  of  a 
policy  which  the  Tory  party  had  always  opposed,  and  that 
some  of  the  proposals  had  been  only  a  few  weeks  before 
violently  denounced  by  the  Prime  Minister  and  the  Chief 
Secretary.  But  their  adoption  was  necessary  for  two  reasons. 
One  was  the  extreme  poverty,  almost  amounting  to  famine, 
of  large  numbers  of  the  small  tenants  in  Ireland.  The 
other  was  that  Lord  Hartington  and  Mr.  Chamberlain  and 
their  followers  had  been  responsible  for  the  Act,  which 
had  now  been  in  force  for  seven  years,  and  could  have  no 
excuse  for  not  pressing  for  its  extension  and  amendment. 

When  I  spoke  at  Plymouth  on  January  3rd,  1888,  I 
was  able  to  say: 

I  am  glad  to  know  that  order  is  being  restored  in 
Ireland,  that  crime  in  that  country  is  diminishing,  that 
the  distresses  of  the  people  are  being  relieved,  and  that 
industry  and  capital  are  gaining  a  little  more  confidence 
now  that  they  feel  that  there  is  a  resolute  protection  behind 
them  in  the  people  of  this  country. 

Next  year's  session  of  Parliament  was  far  more  peaceful. 
Two  valuable  measures — an  Employers'  Liability  Bill  and 
a  Bill  for  permitting  accused  persons  to  give  evidence  in 
their  own  behalf — could  not  be  passed,  although  valuable 
time  had  been  spent  upon  them  :  the  foolish  rules  of  the 
House  caused  that  time  to  be  wholly  thrown  away.  But 
a  Railway  and  Canal  Traffic  Bill  of  great  usefulness  was 
passed ;  and,  much  more  important  still,  a  sytsem  of  Local 


1886-90]  THE   CHANNEL   TUNNEL  271 

Government  was  established  for  England  which  has  amply 
fulfilled  the  hopes  of  its  framers. 

Parnell  had  advised  his  followers  not  to  obstruct  English 
legislation,  expressing  his  belief  that  when  this  came  to 
be  dealt  with  differences  would  arise  which  would  tend 
to  dissolve  the  alliance  with  the  Liberal  Unionists  which 
gave  the  Government  so  strong  a  majority.  There  were 
indeed  some  difficulties  with  regard  to  the  licensing  clauses 
of  the  Local  Government  Bill,  and  those  clauses  had  un- 
fortunately to  be  abandoned ;  but  nothing  serious  happened, 
and  in  July  the  old  question  of  Parnell' s  responsibility  for 
the  letter  which  had  caused  so  much  excitement  a  year 
before  came  back  upon  the  House  of  Commons. 

Before  I  pass  to  that  subject  I  should  like  to  refer  to 
the  only  occasion  on  which  I  gave  a  vote  in  the  House  of 
Commons  which  was  directly  in  conflict  with  my  own 
settled  conviction.  I  had  always  been  a  supporter  of  the 
project  of  a  Channel  Tunnel.  On  one  or  two  occasions  I 
had,  with  my  leader's  consent,  absented  myself  from  the 
House  when  a  division  was  taken.  But  in  1888  Mr.  Glad- 
stone, who  had  hitherto  opposed  the  scheme,  declared  him- 
self a  convert,  and  on  June  27th  vehemently  supported  a 
Bill  authorising  its  construction  which  was  introduced  by 
Sir  Edward  Watkin.  The  Government  opposed  it,  and 
Mr.  Smith,  who  was  rather  nervous  about  the  result  of  the 
division,  said  that  now  the  leader  of  the  Opposition  had 
made  it  a  party  question  he  must  call  upon  me  to  vote 
with  my  colleagues.  In  later  years  the  country  had  great 
reason  to  deplore  the  decision  at  which  the  House  then 
arrived. 

There  is  another  bit  of  work  of  mine  at  this  time  which 
I  should  not  like  to  leave  without  mention,  for  I  hope  the 
time  is  at  last  coming  when  it  may  be  found  helpful  in  a 
great  and  useful  reform.  I  have  long  felt  that  the  separa- 
tion of  the  legal  profession  into  two  separate  branches  is 
a  real  public  mischief.  I  think  it  was  a  conversation  with 
Judah  P.  Benjamin,  the  great  American  lawyer  who  came 
to  the  English  Bar  after  the  defeat  of  the  Southern  Con- 


272  SOLICITOR-GENERAL  [CHAP,  xxn 

federacy,  that  first  convinced  me  of  this.  And  my  view 
was  strengthened  by  the  concurrence  of  Baron  Bramwell, 
one  of  the  finest  judges  I  have  ever  known,  and  a  man  of 
singularly  clear  and  independent  judgment.  I  had  accepted 
the  presidency  of  the  Birmingham  Law  Students'  Society, 
and  on  January  i8th,  1888,  I  made  "  The  Future  of  the 
Legal  Profession  "  the  subject  of  my  presidential  address. 
I  then  expressed  the  opinions  which  all  my  experience  since 
has  strongly  confirmed,  and  I  hope  the  long-delayed  reform 
may  yet  be  helped  by  the  very  careful  statement  which  I 
then  made.  I  was  amused  on  my  return  to  town  to  get  a 
letter  from  Mr.  Smith,  nervous  as  usual,  asking  me  to  make 
it  clear  that  I  spoke  for  myself,  and  not  as  representing 
the  Government. 

In  the  early  part  of  this  year  an  action  for  libel,  mys- 
terious in  its  origin  and  its  objects,  was  brought  against 
The  Times  newspaper.  The  plaintiff  was  Mr.  Frank  Hugh 
O'Donnell,  an  Irishman  of  good  family  and  much  ability, 
who  had  been  a  conspicuous  supporter  of  Mr.  Isaac  Butt, 
and  was  for  a  time  a  trusted  follower  and  associate  of 
Parnell.  This  relationship  had  ceased  in  1883,  and  in 
1885  ne  retired  from  Parliament. 

He  had  been  once  or  twice  mentioned  in  the  articles  on 
Parnellism  and  Crime,  but  not  in  terms  which  could  reason- 
ably be  construed  as  suggesting  that  he  had  been  guilty 
of  any  wrong-doing. 

He  wrote  to  The  Times  correcting  a  statement  which 
one  of  their  correspondents  had  made,  and  The  Times  com- 
mented on  his  letter  as  being  the  correction  of  an  immaterial 
statement,  while  other  statements  which  were  definite  and 
important  remained  unchallenged.  Thereupon  he  brought 
an  action.  But  he  was  only  the  nominal  plaintiff.  As  he 
himself  has  since  stated,  "  Parnell  presided  over  the  whole 
direction  of  the  case."  l  It  was  Parnell  who  "  instructed  " 
the  solicitor  to  obtain  discovery  of  documents,  and  dis- 
cussed the  employment  of  Frank  Lockwood  to  lead  in  the 
case  and  the  payment  of  his  fees  out  of  the  Land  League 

O'Donnell,  History  of  the  Irish  Parliamentary  Party,  ch.  ii,  p.  239. 


i886-go]  A   STRANGE   TRIAL  273 

funds.  He  went  with  the  plaintiff's  solicitor  to  the  office 
of  Mr.  Soames,  the  solicitor  to  The  Times,  to  inspect  the 
documents  which  had  been  set  out  in  the  defendant's 
affidavit;  and  there  in  the  most  important  letter  of  all 
they  noticed  the  two  mistakes  of  spelling,  "  inexcuseable  " 
and  "  hesitency,"  which  put  them  on  the  track  of  the 
forger,  and  were  used  by  Sir  Charles  Russell  with  such  deadly 
effect  when  he  came  to  cross-examine  Pigott  before  the 
Special  Commission.  It  was  not  worth  while  then  to  spend 
Land  League  money  in  briefing  Lockwood,  and  a  very  able 
junior,  Mr.  Ruegg,  was  entrusted  with  the  case.  A  few  days 
before  it  came  on  Sir  Charles  Russell  sent  for  him  and  urged 
him  on  no  account  to  put  O'Donnell  into  the  witness-box 
until  the  case  for  The  Times  had  been  stated  and  its 
evidence  given.  It  had  previously  been  arranged  with  the 
solicitor  that  Parnell  was  not  to  be  called  as  a  witness 
except  in  the  utmost  extremity,  as  he  did  not  wish  to  be 
cross-examined.  It  may  be  that  he  was  reluctant  to 
appear  as  a  witness  because  he  knew  of  incriminating 
matters  which  The  Times  had  not  found  out,  and  feared 
that  his  evidence  might  give  the  clue  to  their  discovery, 
and  this  was  the  explanation  then  current ;  but  it  must 
now  be  remembered  that  he  was  at  this  time  living  with 
Mrs.  O'Shea  at  Brighton,  and  although  this  was  pretty 
generally  known  he  might  well  wish  to  avoid  the  risk  of 
their  relations  becoming  the  subject  of  public  discussion. 
The  course  of  the  trial  before  Lord  Coleridge  on  July  3rd, 
4th,  and  6th,  1888,  was  as  strange  as  the  inception  and  con- 
duct of  the  action  had  been.  Mr.  Ruegg,  who  on  Sir  Charles 
Russell's  advice  had  determined  not  to  call  the  plaintiff 
until  The  Times  case  was  closed,  inadvertently  said  that  he 
intended  to  call  him  in  any  event.  Lord  Coleridge,  who 
was  trying  the  case,  then  pointed  out  that  he  ought  to  call 
him  at  once,  as  there  was  no  certainty  that  the  nature  of 
The  Times  evidence  would  make  his  evidence  in  rebuttal 
admissible.  The  judge  pressed  him  hard,  but  Sir  Charles 
Russell  sent  him  a  note  in  court  urging  him  to  be  firm 
in  his  refusal.  So  after  three  witnesses  had  said  that  they 


274  SOLICITOR-GENERAL  [CHAP,  xxn 

understood  certain  libellous  matter  to  refer  to  the  plaintiff 
his  case  was  closed. 

The  course  taken  by  the  Attorney-General  (Sir  Richard 
Webster)  was  equally  strange.  He  began  by  saying  that 
he  would  ask  the  jury  to  decide  upon  the  merits  and  the 
evidence ;  then  he  spent  two  days  in  reading  the  whole 
of  the  articles  headed  "  Parnellism  and  Crime"  ;  and  then 
said  that  as  these  articles  were  libels  on  other  persons  and 
not  on  the  plaintiff  he  would  not  call  any  evidence  at  all. 
Thereupon  the  jury  promptly  found  that  there  was  no  libel 
upon  the  plaintiff,  and  the  case  was  ended. 

On  the  evening  of  that  day  Parnell  made  a  statement  in 
the  House  of  Commons,  to  which  The  Times  replied,  main- 
taining its  charges. 

On  the  middle  day  of  this  trial  I  had  been  very  busy  in 
the  House  of  Commons  in  passing  through  Committee  the 
Oaths  Bill,  which  has  since  prevented  the  recurrence  in 
Parliament  or  in  the  Courts  of  any  such  difficulty  as  had 
led  to  the  Bradlaugh  controversy. 

My  work  soon  became  much  heavier,  for  before  the  House 
rose  an  Act  was  passed  setting  up  a  Special  Commission 
to  inquire  into  the  charges  made  by  The  Times. 

The  Government  were  very  reluctant  to  appoint  the 
Commission.  They  rightly  held  that  it  was  for  those  who 
complained  of  being  falsely  accused  to  vindicate  themselves 
in  the  Courts  by  action  or  by  a  prosecution.  But  the  repe- 
tition of  the  charges  by  the  Attorney-General,  and  the 
unexpected  finish  of  the  trial,  had  undoubtedly  caused 
some  uneasiness  in  the  public  mind,  and  Chamberlain  and 
his  friends  pressed  hard  for  an  inquiry.  The  idea  of  a 
Committee  was  rejected  for  the  reasons  I  had  successfully 
urged  in  1887,  and  a  Special  Commission  was  the  only 
alternative. 

Webster  was  not  in  favour  of  it,  and  I  was  thoroughly 
against  it.  He  wrote  to  mefrom  Scotland  on  September  3rd: 

I  have  written  to  Smith  to  say  that  in  my  opinion  I 
ought  not  to  appear  before  the  Commission  now  that  it 
has  taken  its  present  shape.  Every  day  I  curse  Chamber- 


1886-90]          MR.    PARNELL'S   TRIUMPH      .  275 

lain  and  the  Unionists  for  their  obstinacy,   but  perhaps 
they  are  wiser  than  I  am. 

The  Commission  sat  to  settle  its  procedure  on  Septem- 
ber I7th,  1888,  and  its  work  continued  until  November  22nd, 
1889,  the  Report  not  being  issued  until  February  I3th,  1890. 

But  no  great  public  interest  was  taken  in  the  proceed- 
ings after  March  6th,  1889,  when  the  grave  charges  against 
Parnell  had  collapsed  with  the  flight  of  Pigott,  after  he 
had  confessed  that  he  was  responsible  for  the  forgeries  by 
which  The  Times  had  been  deceived. 

On  the  day  that  the  counsel  for  The  Times  withdrew 
the  letters  and  all  the  charges  founded  upon  them  a  remark- 
able scene  was  witnessed  in  the  House  of  Commons.  I 
quote  my  description  of  it  from  a  speech  I  made  at  Ply- 
mouth in  1891. 

I  witnessed  not  long  ago,  in  the  year  1889,  one  verY 
remarkable  scene.  The  Special  Commission  had  been 
holding  its  sittings,  and  during  those  sittings  there  had 
been  an  investigation  into  what  were  known  as  the  Pigott 
letters,  and  the  result  of  their  investigation  was  that  the 
letters  were  admitted  by  Pigott  himself  to  have  been 
forged,  and  Mr.  Parnell  was  cleared,  as  the  Commission 
afterwards  pronounced,  of  a  charge  of  infamous  conduct 
which,  if  it  had  been  proved,  would  have  disentitled  him 
to  be  accepted  as  an  ally  or  counsellor  upon  any  question 
of  political  affairs.  But  he  was  cleared  of  that  charge  in 
the  course  of  the  Commission,  and  when  he  came  into  the 
House  of  Commons  that  night  one  of  the  most  remarkable 
scenes  which  ever  occurred  in  that  House  was  witnessed. 
As  he  stepped  along  the  benches  to  his  place  the  whole  of 
the  Liberal  party  above  and  below  the  gangway  rose  to 
do  homage  to  him.  There  was  the  stately  form  of  Sir 
William  Harcourt — who  looked  inclined  to  wipe  the  stain 
of  Parnellite  juice  from  the  corners  of  his  mouth — bend- 
ing in  homage  to  Mr.  Parnell ;  and  there,  more  remarkable 
still,  was  that  statesman  of  peerless  accomplishments  and 
experience,  Mr.  Gladstone,  leaning  with  his  hand  upon  the 
table,  and  turning  and  bowing  towards  Mr.  Parnell.  Sir, 
it  was  an  incident  which  might;  have  disturbed  the  balance 
of  mind  of  a  smaller  man.  I  saw  Mr.  Parnell  standing 


276  SOLICITOR-GENERAL  [CHAP,  xxn 

erect  among  the  whole  standing  crowd.  He  took  no  notice 
of  it  whatever.  He  had  not  asked  them  to  get  up.  When 
they  had  finished  standing  up  they  sat  down,  and  he 
took  no  notice  of  their  rising  or  their  sitting  down  ;  and 
when  they  had  resumed  their  places  he  proceeded  to  make 
a  perfectly  calm  and  quiet  speech,  in  which  he  made  not 
the  smallest  reference,  direct  or  indirect,  to  the  incident, 
extraordinary  as  it  was,  which  had  just  happened.  I 
thought,  as  I  looked  at  him  that  night,  that  that  man  was 
a  born  leader  of  men — calm,  self-confident,  and  powerful ; 
and  depend  upon  it  that,  so  long  as  Mr.  Parnell  lives,  he 
is  a  living  force  with  whom  the  Gladstonians  will  have  to 
reckon  if  they  want  to  enter  into  alliances  for  the  sake  of 
Home  Rule.1 

From  this  period  Parnell's  position  steadily  improved 
and  that  of  the  Government  became  more  and  more  dim- 
cult.  There  was  no  fear  of  their  being  ejected  from  office 
on  a  party  vote,  for  on  any  vital  issue  the  Liberal  Unionists 
would  always  rally  to  their  support;  but  the  Nationalists 
followed  the  wise  advice  of  their  leader,  not  to  push  Irish 
questions  to  the  front,  but  to  find  opportunities  for  em- 
barrassing the  Ministry  in  questions  of  English  legislation. 
In  1889  the  Budget  proposals  as  to  the  taxation  of  spirit 
were  skilfully  used  for  this  purpose.  Meanwhile  Parnell  had 
been  publicly  reconciled  with  Lord  Spencer,  and  towards 
the  close  of  the  year  was  invited  to  stay  at  Hawarden.  The 
tone  of  his  speeches  was  greatly  changed.  On  Decem- 
ber i6th,  the  day  before  he  went  to  be  Mr.  Gladstone's 
guest,  he  made  a  remarkable  speech  at  Nottingham,  which 
showed  how  far  he  had  travelled  since  his  speech  at  the 
Boston  Convention  five  years  before.  There  he  had  said  : 

We  will  work  as  long  as  we  have  life  for  the  consumma- 
tion of  that  object  for  which  our  fathers  worked,  until  we 
have  made  Ireland  a  nation  and  given  her  a  harp  without 
a  crown. 

Now  at  Nottingham  he  disavowed  any  desire  for  the 

separation  of  the  two  countries,  and  said  he  would  not  ask 

• 

1  Public  Speeches,  1890-1900,  p.  7. 


I886-9Q]     A   CONFERENCE   At   tJA^ARDEN  277 

even  for  the  restoration  of  Grattan's  Parliament,  because 
that  gave  the  Irish  the  power  of  separate  action  on  mili- 
tary matters.  At  Hawarden  he  had  two  hours'  talk  with 
Gladstone  on  each  of  two  successive  days,  and  the  Liberal 
leader  found  him  "  one  of  the  very  best  people  to  deal 
with  that  he  had  ever  known."  He  was  at  the  top  of  his 
fortunes.  Welcomed  in  every  gathering  of  English  Liberals, 
followed  with  obsequious  loyalty  by  his  own  supporters, 
received  in  friendly  conference  by  the  venerable  leader  of 
the  Liberal  party,  confident  that  they  united  would  carry 
forward  to  success  the  once  defeated  scheme,  it  looked 
scarcely  possible  that  anything  could  now  stay  his  trium- 
phant course. 

But  the  punishment  of  sin  was  at  hand.  At  the  very 
hour  when  the  two  statesmen  sat  together  in  the  drawing- 
room  at  Hawarden  planning  how  to  use  the  great  majority 
which  their  well-justified  hopes  looked  forward  to  in  the 
next  Parliament,  which  they  thought  could  not  be  long 
postponed,  the  first  steps  were  being  taken  in  the  proceed- 
ings which  within  eleven  months  were  to  drive  him  out  into 
the  storm,  outlawed  by  the  Liberals,  abused  and  insulted 
by  the  men  he  had  led,  to  struggle  on  for  a  few  wild  months 
of  frenzy  and  disease  and  then  to  pass  to  his  grave. 

I  had  no  part  in  the  case  of  O'Donnell  v.  Walter  or  in  the 
proceedings  of  the  Special  Commission,  but  in  July  1889 
I  went  to  Manchester  as  counsel  for  the  Prime  Minister  in 
a  very  interesting  case  which  gave  me  the  welcome  oppor- 
tunity of  cross-examining  one  of  the  most  violent  of  the 
Irish  agitators.  In  the  previous  September  Lord  Salis- 
bury, speaking  at  Watford  and  commenting  on  an  incen- 
diary speech  made  at  Tipperary  by  Mr.  William  O'Brien, 
charged  him,  in  language  of  characteristic  precision,  with 
having  urged  that  men  who  took  unlet  farms  should  be 
treated  as  they  had  been  treated  during  the  last  ten  years 
in  the  locality  in  which  he  spoke,—  "  that  is  to  say,  that 
they  should  be  murdered,  robbed,  their  cattle  shot  and 
ill-treated,  and  their  farms  devastated."  Mr.  O'Brien 
brought  an  action,  claimed  £10,000  damages,  and  laid  the 

19 


278  SOLICITOR-GENERAL  [CHAP,  xx.it 

venue  of  trial  at  Manchester,  where  it  was  quite  reasonably 
supposed  an  impartial  jury  might  be  obtained.  The  plead- 
ings had  been  completed  before  I  was  consulted,  and  when 
I  saw  my  brief  I  found  that  the  first  paragraph  of  the 
statement  of  defence  set  out  that  the  defendant  was  a 
member  of  the  House  of  Peers.  The  next  paragraph  stated 
that  his  speech  was  a  fair  comment  on  matters  of  public 
notoriety  and  concern.  It  appeared  to  be  intended  to 
raise  some  sort  of  defence  of  privilege  on  the  ground 
of  Lord  Salisbury's  rank  and  position.  To  this  I  at 
once  objected.  I  told  Sir  Richard  Nicholson,  Lord 
Salisbury's  solicitor,  that  the  right  course  for  the  Prime 
Minister  was  either  to  admit  that  he  had  been  mistaken 
and  make  a  full  apology,  or  to  say  that  what  he  said 
was  true  and  that  he  was  prepared  to  prove  it.  Sir 
Richard  said  that  had  been  considered,  but  that  it  was 
felt  that  if  a  plea  of  justification  were  set  up  and  failed 
the  damages  would  probably  be  enormous.  He  felt  that 
no  such  step  could  be  taken  without  positive  instructions 
from  his  client.  I  asked  to  see  Lord  Salisbury,  and  we 
had  a  long  talk  with  him  in  his  room  at  the  House  of  Lords. 
He  listened  attentively  while  the  arguments  on  each  side 
were  put  before  him,  and  then  said  that  he  wished  that 
the  pleadings  should  be  altered,  and  the  question  of  truth 
or  untruth  fought  out,  no  question  of  privilege  being 
raised.  This  was  done,  and  it  was  with  a  feeling  of  heavy 
responsibility  that  I  went  to  Manchester  to  lead  for  the 
defence. 

The  trial  began  on  July  igth,  the  day  on  which  Parnell 
received  the  freedom  of  the  city  of  Edinburgh,  which  had 
been  voted  to  him  by  the  town  council,  although  a  plebiscite 
of  the  municipal  electors,  privately  taken,  had  shown  an 
overwhelming  majority  against  it.  My  juniors  were  Ambrose, 
Q.C.  (then  or  afterwards  M.P.  for  the  Harrow  division 
of  Middlesex,  Danckwerts  (who  drew  the  original  pleadings), 
and  Lord  Robert  Cecil,  who  had  been  called  to  the  Bar 
a  few  months  before  his  father  made  the  Watford  speech  : 
a  young  junior  counsel  on  the  circuit  was  also  briefed.  On 


1886-90]  AN   IMPORTANT   VERDICT  279 

the  other  side  were  Gully,  Q.C.  (afterwards  Speaker  of  the 
House  of  Commons,  and  later  created  Lord  Selby),  Big- 
ham,  Q.C.  (afterwards  President  of  the  Probate  Division, 
and  later  Lord  Mersey),  two  of  the  leaders  of  the  Northern 
Circuit,  and  a  junior  named  Anderson.  The  judge  was 
Fitzjames  Stephen,  who  in  his  prime  was  one  of  the  finest 
judges  who  ever  sat  on  the  English  Bench.  At  this  time  his 
powers  were  failing;  and  our  anxieties  were  increased  by 
some  peculiarities  in  his  behaviour,  which  soon  after  became 
painfully  marked.  Our  first  difficulty  was  with  regard  to 
the  jury,  for  public  feeling  in  Manchester  was  very  sharply 
divided,  and  Gully  and  I  both  feared  that  the  case  might 
have  an  unsatisfactory  ending  in  the  failure  of  the  jury 
to  agree  upon  a  verdict.  However,  we  agreed  that  there 
should  be  no  challenges ;  and  the  first  twelve  special  jurors 
called  were  impanelled  to  try  the  case. 

The  trial  lasted  three  days.  The  plaintiff  was  called 
and  briefly  examined  in  chief,  and  my  cross-examination 
filled  five  columns  of  7  he  Times.  I  stated  our  case,  and 
then  we  called  witnesses,  who  gave  evidence  of  a  system 
of  intimidation  and  outrage  and  murder,  of  the  most 
cruel  boycotting,  of  callous  and  inhuman  behaviour  to  the 
relatives  of  those  who  had  been  murdered, — a  story  which 
had  never  been  told  with  such  distinctness,  and  which,  told 
as  it  now  was  in  brief  consecutive  narrative,  made  an 
immense  impression  on  the  jury,  and  afterwards  on  the 
country.  We  went  on  until  Gully,  seeing  the  effect  that 
was  being  produced,  and  seeing  that  cross-examination 
only  gave  fresh  force  and  emphasis  to  the  evidence,  ceased 
to  cross-examine,  and  admitted  that  there  had  been  a 
formidable  number  of  outrages  in  Ireland.  I  had  still 
sixteen  or  seventeen  witnesses  to  call,  but  I  dispensed  with 
them,  and  after  our  closing  speeches  and  the  judge's  sum- 
ming up  the  jury  went  out  to  consider  their  verdict.  They 
had  hardly  time  to  go  to  their  room  to  consult,  for  in  six 
minutes  they  were  back  in  court  with  a  verdict  for  Lord 
Salisbury.  The  streets  of  Manchester  were  thronged,  and 
before  I  could  get  back  to  the  Queen's  Hotel  the  news- 


2&>  SOLICITOR-GENERAL  [CHAP,  xxn 

paper  boys  were  selling  the  reports  of  the  closing  scenes 
in  court  as  fast  as  they  could  hand  out  the  papers  from 
the  carts.  Stephen  went  on  to  Liverpool  to  try  Mrs. 
Maybrick,  and  was  hooted  in  the  streets  by  the  Irishmen. 
A  letter  of  warm  thanks  came  to  me  from  my  grateful 
client. 

Lady  Clarke  was  at  the  time  staying  at  Hygeia  House, 
Staines,  which  I  had  rented  for  July  and  August.  I  of 
course  had  to  stay  a  good  deal  in  town,  and  a  few  sentences 
from  my  daily  letters  from  the  House  of  Commons  may 
relieve  the  dullness  of  a  political  narrative. 

Tuesday,  July  2$rd,  1889. 

I  have  had  my  fill  of  praise  and  congratulation  since 
I  came  to  town  yesterday.  The  people  here  seem  very 
delighted  and  a  little  surprised  at  the  Manchester  victory, 
and  are  very  enthusiastic  about  it.  I  have  been  pretty 
busy  these  two  days.  Yesterday  I  was  fighting  Henry 
James  in  a  will  case,  and  beat  him ;  and  to-day  I  have  been 
in  Chancery  for  the  Coal  Consumers'  Co.,  and  have  done  very 
well  for  them.  .  .  .  Last  night  I  went  to  the  St.  Stephen's 
Club  to  a  dinner  (private)  at  which  Mr.  Balfour  was  speak- 
ing, but  it  was  rather  a  hardworking  sort  of  repast,  for 
three  times  the  division  bell  brought  us  running  over  to 
the  House.  We  are  getting  to  the  end  of  the  Scotch  Bills, 
but  our  opponents  seem  resolved  to  give  us  as  much  trouble 
as  they  can. 

August  2nd,  1889. 

We  are  spending  the  evening  here  with  little  debate 
and  many  divisions,  and  since  I  began  this  I  have  been 
called  away  to  one  useless  march  round  the  lobbies.  The 
only  interest  about  them  is  to  see  Mr.  Gladstone,  looking 
terribly  worn  and  tired,  marching  along  among  us,  carrying 
his  blotting-pad  and  half-written  letters  with  him,  and 
without  a  single  one  of  his  old  colleagues  to  keep  him  com- 
pany.1 They  are  all  staying  away  from  the  House,  and 
this  last  night  of  the  session,  as  far  as  he  is  concerned  (for 
he  goes  to  Hawarden  to-morrow),  he  is  quite  deserted. 

1  The  divisions  were  upon  the  Tithes  Bill. 


1886-90]       LIVELY    TIMES    IN   THE   HOUSE  281 

August  6th,   1889. 

DEAREST  WIFE, 

I  have  very  nearly  missed  the  post  again  this  even- 
ing, for  about  an  hour  ago  I  went  into  the  House,  and 
thought  I  would  stay  and  listen  to  the  debate.  The  Irish 
Estimates  are  on,  and  one  MacNeill  (we  call  him  Pongo) 
was  raging  away  about  the  arrest  of  Father  McFadden.  He 
sent  me  off  into  a  sweet  sleep  on  the  Treasury  bench,  and 
I  do  not  know  how  long  it  would  have  lasted  had  not  Sir 
Herbert  Maxwell  woke  me  up  for  a  business  matter  he 
wanted  to  see  me  about.  You  would  not  have  missed  any 
news.  Percival  will  have  brought  you  reports  from  Russell 
Square,  and  Rosher l  will  have  told  you  how  little  has  been 
doing  in  court. 

But  you  can  at  least  have  a  message  of  love  from  me. 
My  letter  would  be  full  of  "  yesterday  "  and  "  to-morrow  " — 
the  yesterday  when  I  saw  you  and  the  to-morrow  when  we 
shall  meet  again.  But  memories  and  expectations  are 
both  of  them  too  copious  and  too  sweet  for  expression ; 
so  I  only  say,  I  look  forward  to  being  with  my  love  as  early 
as  I  can  to-morrow. 

Ever  fondly  yours, 

E.  C. 

August  gth,   1889. 

We  are  having  very  lively  times  in  the  House,  and  last 
night  were  within  an  ace  of  having  a  free  fight  in  front  of 
the  Chair.  Harrington  threw  down  his  hat,  and  stepped 
out  into  the  gangway  with  the  full  intention  of  rushing  at 
Balfour,  but  thought  better  of  it  just  in  time. 

A  good  many  of  the  Irishmen  had  had  too  much  to  drink, 
and  Parnell  has  gone  off  to  Ireland  to  shoot  grouse  (I  am 
told),  and  left  them  with  orders  to  keep  up  the  fight. 

August  itfh,  1889. 

We  had  a  pretty  lively  evening  here  yesterday,  for  in  one 
division  the  majority  was  only  four,  and  even  that  was 
better  than  some  of  our  friends  expected.  So  you  see  my 
vote  was  really  of  consequence.  As  I  could  not  be  with 
you  I  honoured  the  day 2  by  standing  grouse  and  cham- 
pagne to  fifteen  of  my  colleagues.  When  the  birds  were 

1  G.  B.  Rosher,  an  old  pupil,  who  helped  me  for  many  years, 
3  Our  wedding  day. 


282  SOLICITOR-GENERAL  [CHAP,  xxn 

killed  I  do  not  know,  but  they  were  in  very  good  condition. 
.  .  .  We  have  just  had  another  division,  but  we  have  got 
back  to  majorities  of  about  thirty,  so  the  excitement  has 
rather  gone  off. 

August  i6th,  1889. 

We  have  just  been  having  a  particularly  interesting  dis- 
cussion in  the  House,  and  the  result  of  it  is  that  the  Tithes 
Bill  is  withdrawn,  the  Estimates  are  to  be  got  through  as 
soon  as  possible,  and  we  can  pretty  well  see  our  way  to 
winding  up  the  session.  I  fear,  however,  that  will  take  us 
a  full  fortnight,  and  that  we  shall  probably  only  get  free 
the  day  after  the  Staines  tenancy  expires.  It  is  very  vexing 
to  think  that  we  might  probably  have  got  away  to-morrow, 
if  we  had  not  brought  in  that  unfortunate  Bill.  To  have 
spent  all  this  time  in  failing  to  pass  it  is  really  too  sad. 

In  December  I  had  a  letter  from  Mr.  Joseph  Soames, 
asking  me  to  accept  the  leading  brief  for  The  Times  in  the 
action  for  libel  which  had  been  brought  against  them  by 
Mr.  Parnell,  and  which  was  to  come  on  for  trial  soon  after 
Christmas.  Sir  Henry  James  and  Mr.  George  Askwith 
were  to  be  my  juniors.  I  wrote  to  Lord  Salisbury,  asking 
what  he  would  wish  me  to  do,  and  he,  after  consultation 
with  Mr.  Smith,  replied  leaving  the  matter  entirely  to  my 
decision.  I  thereupon  refused  the  brief.  I  reproduce  the 
letter  in  which  I  told  the  Prime  Minister  of  this,  for  there 
are  a  few  words  in  it  which  will  explain  my  refusal  six  years 
later  to  resume  the  post  of  Solicitor-General. 

37,  RUSSELL  SQUARE, 

December  2jtht  1889. 

DEAR  LORD  SALISBURY, 

I  am  very  much  obliged  by  your  most  kind  and 
considerate  letter,  and  hope  you  will  not  think  that  I 
troubled  you  unnecessarily  when  you  hear  that,  under- 
standing that  you  leave  me  full  liberty  of  action,  I  have 
decided  to  refuse  the  brief  offered  me  by  The  Times.  Dur- 
ing the  last  few  days  I  have  thought  much  over  the  different 
aspects  of  the  question,  and  I  cannot  help  thinking  that 
by  now  accepting  the  position  of  counsel  for  The  Times  in 
such  a  case  as  this  I  should  run  a  risk,  however  remote, 


1886-90]     O'SHEA    V.    O'SHEA    AND    PARNELL          283 

of  disabling  myself  from  rendering  effective  service  to  the 
Government.  Until  the  report  of  the  Special  Commission 
is  published  it  is  impossible  to  forecast  what  action  the 
Government  may  find  it  necessary  or  convenient  to  take, 
and  I  fear  that  some  of  our  friends  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons would  not  understand,  and  would  be  inclined  to 
resent,  my  putting  it  in  the  power  of  our  opponents  to  say 
that  both  the  Law  Officers  were  in  the  pay  of  The  '  imes. 

The  Attorney-General  had  no  reason  for  refusing  the 
brief  in  O'Donnell  v.  Walter,  for  he  could  not  foresee  to 
what  it  might  lead ;  but  the  same  excuse  would  not  avail 
for  me.  Again,  I  fear  my  action  might  do  much  to  strengthen 
the  proposal,  which  I  think  a  mischievous  one,  although 
it  could  hardly  affect  me  personally,  that  the  Law  Officers 
should  be  forbidden  to  take  private  practice.  The  interests 
of  The  Times  are  quite  safe  in  the  hands  of  Sir  Henry  James  ; 
and  although  I  lose  an  opportunity  of  distinction,  that  is 
after  all  a  very  small  matter. 

On  February  4th,  1890  (curiously  enough  it  was  on  the 
very  day  that  The  Times  announced  the  settlement  of  the 
Parnell  libel  case  by  an  agreed  verdict  for  £5,000),  Lewis 
Coward  came  over  to  my  room  at  the  Law  Courts  to  tell 
me  that  he  had  a  very  important  divorce  case  in  hand 
which  gave  him  much  anxiety,  and  he  had  told  his  solicitor 
client  that  he  did  not  wish  to  take  any  further  step  in  it 
without  having  a  consultation  with  the  leader  who  would 
have  to  conduct  it  in  court.  It  was  the  application  of 
Captain  O'Shea  for  a  divorce  from  his  wife  on  the  ground 
of  her  adultery  with  Mr.  Parnell.  The  petition  had  already 
been  filed.  I  learned  afterwards  from  Captain  O'Shea  that 
in  October  or  November  of  the  previous  year  he  had  be- 
come aware  that  adulterous  relations  existed  between  his 
wife  and  the  Irish  leader.  He  had  gone  into  a  room 
adjoining  her  bedroom  at  Walsingham  Terrace,  Brighton, 
and  had  there  found  Mr.  Parneirs  dressing  utensils  and 
some  of  his  clothes.  He  spoke  to  a  friend  about  the  dis- 
covery, and  was  advised  to  lay  it  before  Cardinal  Manning, 
as  the  rules  of  the  Roman  Church,  to  which  he  and  his  wife 
both  belonged,  forbade  any  resort  to  the  Divorce  Court. 


284  SOLICITOR-GENERAL  [CHAP,  xxn 

Together  with  his  statement  he  sent  to  the  Cardinal  copies 
of  certain  incriminating  letters  which  had  somehow  come 
into  his  possession.  He  told  me  that  a  fortnight  later  he 
was  glad  he  had  taken  the  precaution  only  to  send  copies, 
for  he  found  that  the  Cardinal  had  consulted  Sir  Charles 
Russell  and  Mr.  George  Lewis,  and  the  documents  had  been 
shown  to  them.  Indignant  at  this,  he  demanded  their 
return,  and  determined  to  sue  for  a  divorce. 

Strangely  enough,  he  went  with  his  papers  to  Mr.  Joseph 
Soames,  the  solicitor  for  The  Times,  who  had  conducted 
their  case  before  the  Special  Commission,  which  had  not 
yet  reported,  and,  more  strangely  still,  that  very  dull  but 
respectable  solicitor  accepted  his  instructions,  and  the  cita- 
tion was  actually  issued  by  him.  The  impropriety,  to  say 
the  least  of  it,  of  his  acting  in  such  a  case  at  such  a  time, 
however,  soon  occurred  to  Mr.  Soames,  or  was  suggested  to 
him,  and  he  advised  the  Captain  to  employ  some  one  else. 
But,  with  marvellous  ill  judgement,  he  suggested  the  name 
of  Mr.  Day,  a  young  solicitor  of  only  ten  months'  standing, 
who,  apart  from  his  inexperience,  was  the  most  unfit  man, 
except  Mr.  Soames  himself,  who  could  possibly  have  been 
employed,  for  he  was  the  son  of  Mr.  Justice  Day,  one  of 
the  Special  Commissioners,  and  himself,  as  was  his  son,  a 
Roman  Catholic.  Day  retained  me  and  instructed  Lewis 
Coward,  and  the  petition  was  filed,  and  then  Coward 
suggested  an  immediate  consultation  with  me. 

Day  came  to  consultation,  and  I  at  once  asked  where  the 
original  letters  were  which  might  be  of  so  much  importance. 

"  Oh,"  said  Day,  "  here  they  are,"  and  putting  his  hand 
into  the  breast  pocket  of  his  coat  produced  a  pocket-book 
containing  them. 

"  My  dear  sir,'1  said  I,  "  how  long  have  you  had  them 
there  ?  " 

"  Ever  since  I  was  first  instructed,"  said  he.  "  I  was  not 
going  to  trust  them  out  of  my  possession." 

It  was  quite  plain  that  in  the  interests  of  the  client  the 
case  must  not  be  left  in  such  hands,  and  as  gently  as  pos- 
sible I  pointed  out  to  him  the  obvious  objections  to  his 


1886-90]  A   CHANGE    OF   SOLICITORS  285 

continuing  to  act.  At  first  he  was  somewhat  hurt,  but  after 
a  time  he  consented  to  my  discussing  the  matter  with  his 
father,  who  was  one  of  my  oldest  and  closest  friends.  So 
directly  the  consultation  was  over  I  went  to  see  Sir  John  Day. 
To  my  surprise  he  did  not  at  first  seem  to  see  the  objections 
to  the  son  conducting  a  divorce  case  against  a  man  upon 
whom  the  father  was  at  that  very  time  sitting  as  judge  in 
grave  charges  of  criminality,  and  said  he  did  not  think  he 
ought  to  prevent  his  son  having  a  case  which  would  be  very 
profitable,  and  useful  in  other  ways ;  but  eventually  he  took 
a  different  view,  and  authorised  me  to  say  that  he  thought 
it  advisable  that  the  case  should  pass  into  other  hands.  I 
asked  young  Day  to  come  and  see  me,  and  told  him  my 
views  and  what  had  passed  with  his  father,  and  asked 
him  to  consider  the  matter  carefully. 

Early  next  morning  the  Captain  appeared  at  my  room 
in  a  state  of  angry  excitement  at  having  been  thrown  over 
by  another  solicitor ;  for  he  had  just  received  a  letter  from 
Day  asking  him  to  put  the  case  into  other  hands.  He 
asked  me  whom  he  should  employ,  and  of  course  I  named 
Mr.  Muskett,  the  managing  clerk  to  Messrs.  Wontner. 
That  firm  had  the  largest  practice  in  criminal  cases  except 
Mr.  Lewis,  and  I  had  long  known  Mr.  Muskett  as  one  of 
the  ablest  and  most  discreet  of  lawyers. 

An  appointment  was  made  for  a  consultation  that  after- 
noon ;  Mr.  Day  attended,  the  papers  were  handed  over, 
and  before  night  our  anxiety  about  them  was  ended,  for 
the  originals  were  safely  lodged  with  the  National  Safe 
Deposit  Company.  And  at  this  consultation  I  arranged 
that  Mr.  Muskett  should  come  in  and  see  me  at  any  time 
without  troubling  to  appoint  a  consultation,  and  that  no 
step  should  be  taken  in  the  case  without  my  personal 
knowledge  and  advice. 

The  announcement  of  the  commencement  of  these  pro- 
ceedings attracted  very  little  public  attention.  The  rela- 
tions between  Mrs.  O'Shea  and  the  Irish  leader  had  indeed 
long  been  notorious.  Their  political  association  began  as 
early  as  1880,  and  it  was  at  a  lunch  at  which  Mr.  Parnell 


286  SOLICITOR-GENERAL  [CHAP,  xxn 

was  present  that  Mr.  Gladstone,  always  very  susceptible  to 
the  charms  of  women  of  beauty  and  wit,  first  met,  and 
was  much  attracted  by,  this  remarkable  woman.  In  1882 
she  was  the  intermediary  between  the  Cabinet  and  the 
Irish  leader  in  arranging  the  disgraceful  treaty  of  Kilmain- 
ham,  the  full  terms  of  which  would  have  been  concealed 
from  the  House  of  Commons  but  for  the  vigilance  and 
firmness  of  Mr.  Forster.  As  early  as  1881  Captain  O'Shea 
had  cause  for  suspicion,  and  challenged  Mr.  Parnell  to  a 
duel.  This  was  somehow  avoided,  and  the  intrigue  con- 
tinued. In  February  1882  a  girl  was  born,  of  whom  the 
Captain  mistakenly  supposed  himself  to  be  the  father. 
She  lived  only  two  months,  and  Parnell,  released  for  a 
short  time  from  Kilmainham,  went  to  Eltham  to  embrace 
his  dying  child.  Two  more  daughters  were  born,  one  in 
March  1883  and  one  in  November  1884. 

In  1885  a  vacancy  occurred  in  the  representation  of 
Galway,  and,  to  the  indignation  of  some  members  of  his 
party,  Mr.  Parnell  decided  that  Captain  O'Shea  should  be 
the  Nationalist  candidate,  and  went  himself  to  Galway  to 
make  speeches  in  his  support.  Justin  McCarthy  and  Tim 
Healy  went  to  speak  for  the  other  candidate,  and  the  latter 
boldly  alleged  the  nature  of  Parnell's  relations  with  Mrs. 
O'Shea.  These  were  known  to  his  followers,  for  some  time 
before  a  letter  to  him  from  Mrs.  O'Shea  had  been  opened 
by  one  member  of  the  party,  and  of  course  the  knowledge 
of  one  soon  became  the  knowledge  of  all.  They  used  to 
joke  about  "  Kitty  "  in  his  absence  ;  for  there  was  never 
a  man  among  them  who  would  have  dared  to  do  it  in  his 
presence.  I  heard  at  the  House  of  Commons  of  his  nightly 
visits  to  Eltham.  He  was  a  shrewd  man  in  many  things, 
but  his  expedients  for  securing  secrecy  were  quite  childish 
in  their  futility. 

He  used  to  take  a  hansom  cab  at  Westminster  and  drive 
to  the  Nelson  public-house  in  the  Old  Kent  Road.  There 
he  dismissed  his  cab  and  walked  a  little  way,  and  then 
took  another  to  Eltham.  He  could  not  have  adopted  a 
better  plan  for  betraying  his  secret. 


1886-90]  POLITICAL    HOPES    AND    FEARS  287 

These  things,  however,  did  not  impair  in  the  least  degree 
his  authority  over  his  party  or  the  harmony  of  his  rela- 
tions with  the  Liberal  leaders,  and  in  the  spring  of  1890 
Mr.  Gladstone  was  looking  forward  to  the  General  Election 
which  must  come  in  a  year  or  two,  and  was  confident  that 
it  would  give  him  a  majority  of  at  least  a  hundred,  and  so 
make  certain  the  passing  of  a  Home  Rule  measure. 

Meanwhile  the  Ministry  stumbled  on  in  the  House  of 
Commons.  The  gradual  alienation  of  the  Liberal  Unionists 
which  had  begun  with  the  exposure  of  the  Pigott  forgeries 
was  still  more  marked  after  the  Commission  had  made  its 
final  report.  Lord  Randolph  Churchill  made  a  damaging 
attack  on  the  Ministry,  majorities  became  painfully  small, 
elections  went  against  us,  and  the  leader  of  the  House, 
always  nervous  and  distrustful  of  his  own  judgment,  was 
harassed  by  a  painful  disease.  His  heroic  devotion  to 
public  duty  alone  enabled  him  to  continue  his  regular 
attendance  at  the  House.  Our  expectations  as  to  the 
future  quite  agreed  with  Mr.  Gladstone's ;  and  so  badly 
did  things  go  with  us  during  the  session  that  Sir  William 
Harcourt  hardly  seemed  to  exaggerate  when  he  said  in  a 
speech  at  the  National  Liberal  Club  on  July  gth  that 
Mr.  Gladstone's  party  had  only  "  to  complete  the  rout  of  a 
defeated  foe  and  the  pursuit  of  a  flying  enemy." 

Four  months  later  a  verdict  in  the  Divorce  Court  over- 
turned all  these  hopes  and  fears  and  postponed  Home 
Rule  for  a  generation. 

At  the  end  of  this  session  of  1890  I  had  a  disappointment 
which,  like  all  but  one  of  the  disappointments  of  my  life, 
was  soon  atoned  for  by  consequences  which  no  one  could  have 
foreseen.  I  had  never  ceased  to  urge  upon  my  colleagues 
in  public  speech  and  private  conversation  the  adoption  of 
the  proposal  to  carry  on  Bills  from  one  session  to  another 
which  Lord  Salisbury  had  made  in  1879,  an<^  which  I  had 
brought  forward  in  the  House  of  Commons  in  1882.  In 
the  summer  of  1890  there  were  two  Bills  before  the  House 
of  Commons  which  the  Ministry  were  not  strong  enough 
to  carry.  To  abandon  them  would  be  a  humiliating  con- 


288  SOLICITOR-GENERAL  [CHAP,  xxn 

fession  of  weakness.  So  at  a  meeting  of  the  Conservative 
party  the  Prime  Minister  announced  that  a  Standing  Order 
would  be  proposed  under  which  these  Bills  could  be  carried 
forward  to  the  next  session.  A  strong  committee  was 
appointed  to  consider  the  proposal,  and  I  hoped  that  a 
most  useful  reform  might  be  carried  by  general  consent. 
But  party  spirit  was  too  strong,  and  the  manifest  embarrass- 
ment of  the  Government  offered  too  tempting  opportunity 
for  its  exercise.  Mr.  Gladstone  came  as  a  witness  and  made 
a  violent  attack  on  the  proposal,  and  the  resolution  approv- 
ing the  proposed  Standing  Order,  and  a  reasoned  report 
prepared  by  Mr.  Balfour  justifying  it,  were  only  carried  by 
a  party  majority  of  n  to  9.  I  think  it  is  worth  while 
to  record  the  names.  For  the  resolution  and  report  which 
were  moved  by  the  Chairman,  Mr.  Goschen,  there  voted 
Lord  Hartington,  Mr.  Chamberlain,  Mr.  Arthur  Balfour, 
Sir  H.  S.  Northcote,  Sir  Algernon  Borthwick,  Mr.  Jennings, 
Mr.  Penrose  Fitzgerald,  Mr.  T.  W.  Russell,  Colonel  Mal- 
colm, Mr.  John  Talbot,  and  Sir  Edward  Clarke.  On  the 
other  side  were  Mr.  Gladstone,  Sir  William  Harcourt,  Mr. 
John  Morley,  Mr.  Sexton,  Mr.  Labouchere,  Mr.  Dillon, 
Mr.  Dillwyn,  Dr.  Hunter,  and  Mr.  Whitbread.  But  to  my 
great  disappointment  the  report  was  not  acted  upon.  Mr. 
Smith  was  very  unwell,  and  told  me  he  could  not  face  the 
three  or  four  days  of  angry  debate  which  would  be  needed 
to  adopt  the  proposal,  and  it  was  therefore  determined  to 
abandon  it.  The  two  Bills — the  Tithes  Bill  and  the  Irish 
Land  Purchase  Bill — were  dropped,  an  autumn  session 
was  resolved  upon,  and  on  August  22nd  Parliament  was 
prorogued. 

This  decision  had  momentous  and  unexpected  conse- 
quences. Parliament  was  to  reassemble  on  Tuesday,  No- 
vember 25th,  and  a  meeting  of  the  Irish  parliamentary 
party  was  summoned  for  that  day.  The  annual  meeting 
of  the  National  Liberal  Federation,  at  which  Sir  William 
Harcourt  and  Mr.  John  Morley  were  to  speak,  was  to  be 
held  at  Sheffield  on  the  2ist. 

Meanwhile  the  Long  Vacation  came  to  an  end,  the  Law 


1886-90]  THE   DIVORCE   TRIAL  289 

Courts  reassembled,  and  the  fateful  divorce  case  appeared 
in  the  list  for  trial. 

A  step  had  been  taken  by  the  respondent  which  I  have 
never  understood.  At  first  the  defence  put  in  both  by 
Mrs.  O'Shea  and  by  Mr.  Parnell  was  a  simple  denial  of  the 
adultery.  Later  in  the  proceedings  Mrs.  O'Shea  amended 
her  defence  by  adding  a  plea  alleging  that  Captain  O'Shea 
had  been  guilty  of  conduct  conducing  to  her  adultery, 
that  he  had  connived  at  and  condoned  it,  and  she  added  a 
counter-charge  alleging  his  adultery  with  her  sister,  Mrs. 
Steele.  Who  could  have  advised  this  step,  or  why  Mr.  Parnell 
permitted  it,  was  and  is  a  mystery.  The  charge  against  Mrs. 
Steele  was  utterly  baseless  and  wanton ;  while  of  course  the 
plea  of  connivance  was  in  effect  an  admission  of  the  adul- 
tery alleged  against  herself.  But  the  whole  business  was 
full  of  puzzles.  During  the  week  before  the  trial  we  had 
consultations  almost  every  day,  and  we  heard  all  sorts  of 
rumours.  One  day  we  were  told  that  Mr.  Parnell' s 
solicitors  had  no  instructions ;  another  that  a  staff  of  clerks 
were  at  work  at  the  house  at  Brighton  preparing  briefs  for 
the  defence  ;  next  day  we  heard  from  Captain  O'Shea  that 
it  had  been  intimated  to  him  that  he  could  have  £20,000 
if  he  would  abandon  the  suit.  And  strange  witnesses  came 
to  Mr.  Muskett,  and  offered  to  give  curious  and  incredible 
details  of  the  adultery  they  said  they  could  prove. 

So  we  went  into  court  on  Saturday,  November  I5th, 
quite  uncertain  as  to  what  would  happen.  Sir  Charles 
Butt  was  the  judge,  and  Inderwick  and  Lewis  Coward 
were  my  juniors. 

When  I  went  into  court  Frank  Lockwood  was  already  in 
the  Queen's  Counsel  row,  and  he  came  across  to  speak  to 
me.  I  guessed  what  was  coming,  and  refused  to  hear  any- 
thing privately.  I  wished  to  be  able  to  say  that  I  knew 
nothing  of  the  course  he  intended  to  take  until  it  was  publicly 
announced  in  court.  Then  he,  when  the  judge  came  in, 
said  he  appeared  for  Mrs.  O'Shea,  and  did  not  intend  to 
take  any  part  in  the  proceedings.  The  position  was  rather 
embarrassing  for  me,  for  in  view  of  the  defence  of  con- 


2go  SOLICITOR-GENERAL  [CHAP,  xxil 

nivance  and  the  counter-charge  I  had  prepared  myself  to 
open  the  case  very  fully,  and  had  decided  to  call  among 
my  earliest  witnesses  young  Harry  O'Shea  and  one  or  both 
of  the  two  girls  who  had  been  born  before  the  acquaint- 
ance with  Parnell  had  begun.  I  at  once  decided  to  do 
without  their  evidence,  to  make  my  statement  as  short 
as  possible,  and  to  call  only  a  few  witnesses.  Mr.  George 
Lewis  came  to  me  with  a  message  from  Mr.  Parnell,  who 
had  been  subpoenaed,  and  was,  he  said,  in  attendance,  asking 
that  I  would  if  possible  dispense  with  his  appearance  in 
court  for  the  purpose  of  identification,  and  he  handed  me 
a  few  recent  photographs.  I  managed  to  make  these  do. 
We  might  have  finished  the  case  that  day,  but  I  wanted 
to  call  Mrs.  Steele  to  deny  publicly  the  charge  that  had 
been  made  against  her,  and  she  was  not  in  attendance.  So 
the  case  stood  over  until  the  I7th,  and  then,  after  a  little 
more  evidence  and  a  short  summing  up,  the  jury  gave  their 
verdict,  and  a  decree  nisi  was  pronounced. 

The  political  effect  was  immediate  and  overwhelming. 
That  the  result  of  the  trial  should  come  as  a  complete  sur- 
prise to  the  leaders  of  the  Liberal  party  is  difficult  to  explain. 
Mr.  John  Morley  had  been  for  years  the  friend  and  adviser 
of  the  Irish  leader.  Two  days  before  the  trial  took  place 
he  told  Mr.  Gladstone  that  Parnell  was  going  to  be  trium- 
phantly acquitted.  Parnell  had  given  him  that  assur- 
ance. I  think  the  explanation  is  that  ParnelTs  solicitors 
believed  down  to  the  last  moment  that  Captain  O'Shea 
would  not  appear  in  court ;  and  I  suspect  that  the  pleas 
of  connivance  and  condonation  were  put  on  the  record  with 
the  idea  of  making  it  more  easy  to  bribe  or  to  frighten  him 
into  the  abandonment  of  his  suit. 

There  was  another  way  out  which  would  have  suited 
the  Liberal  leaders  even  better.  That  was  the  disappear- 
ance of  Parnell  from  political  life,  leaving  a  solid  body  of 
Irish  Home  Rulers  without  any  very  strong  leader,  and 
therefore  the  more  amenable  to  the  friendly  control  of 
their  English  allies.  And  this  nearly  happened.  Some  time 
before  the  trial  Parnell  entertained  the  idea  of  leaving 


1886-90]  WILL  HE  ASK  FOR  CHILTERN  HUNDREDS  ?  291 

England  with  Mrs.  O'Shea,  and  taking  the  two  girls,  born 
in  1883  and  1884,  wno  were  unquestionably  his  daughters, 
and  he  consulted  Mr.  Inderwick  whether  there  was  any 
European  country  in  which  Mrs.  O'Shea,  in  spite  of  the 
orders  of  an  English  court  of  law,  would  be  able  to  retain 
the  custody  of  these  children. 

On  the  Sunday  that  came  between  the  opening  of  the 
divorce  case  and  the  verdict  and  decree  Mr.  Gladstone 
heard  of  the  evidence  already  given,  and  his  first  question 
was,  "  Will  he  ask  for  the  Chiltern  Hundreds  ?  "  This  is 
an  autobiography  and  not  a  political  history,  but  the  fol- 
lowing quotation  from  a  speech  I  made  at  Plymouth  on 
January  5th,  1891,  may  have  its  interest  in  both  aspects : 

It  is  seven  weeks  to-day  since  I  heard,  in  a  case  in  which 
I  myself  appeared  as  counsel,  a  verdict  given  which  has 
materially  and  permanently  affected  the  political  fortunes 
of  both  parties  in  this  country.  It  is  hardly  possible  to 
realise  the  change  that  has  passed  over  the  prospects  of 
English  political  parties  in  that  short  period  of  seven 
weeks.  On  the  Saturday  I  had  been  called  upon  in  the 
course  of  my  professional  duty  to  make  a  speech,  which 
was  afterwards  supported  and  proved  by  evidence — only 
as  much  evidence  as  was  necessary  in  the  circumstances  of 
the  case — and  produced  the  result  that,  for  the  moment, 
the  leader  of  the  Gladstonian  party  has  refused  to  have 
any  political  action  in  common  with  the  leader  of  the  Irish 
wing  of  the  Home  Rule  party.  The  incidents  that  have 
passed  in  that  short  period  of  seven  weeks  are  incidents 
upon  which  it  is  not  undesirable  that  we  should  meditate 
and  reflect  this  evening.  Many  of  them  have  been  of  an 
extremely  amusing  character.  The  Irish  party  can  never 
keep  out  entirely  the  involuntary  Irish  humour  from  the 
proceedings,  political  and  otherwise,  in  which  they  are 
engaged;  and  when  they  began  their  proceedings  in  Com- 
mittee Room  No.  15  by  solemnly  discussing  whether  they 
should  resolve  that  the  general  meeting  of  the  Irish  party 
should  be  called  for  "  last  Friday,"  they  started  a  series 
of  incidents  which  maintained  their  character  to  the  very 
end  of  the  chapter.  They  did  not  decide  anything — it 
was  not  to  be  expected  that  they  should  put  that  important 


2Q2  SOLICITOR-GENERAL  [CHA*>.  xxil 

question;  but  having  broken  up  in  disorder  in  the  dusk 
of  one  December  evening,  they  transferred  themselves  to 
Dublin,  and  there  started  the  Home  Rule  campaign  in 
two  different  factions.  They  first  started — by  way  of 
showing  what  they  expected  from  unity  when  Home  Rule 
should  be  achieved — two  rival  and  opposition  "  United 
Irelands";  and  when  the  imitation  "  United  Ireland  "  was 
put  down  by  law,  they  started  again,  with  true  Irish  humour, 
a  paper  which  was  published  all  over  Dublin  and  was  called 
"  Suppressed  United  Ireland  " ;  and  since  then  they  have 
been  indulging  in  a  faction  fight  of  the  most  charming 
character  at  Kilkenny ;  and  by  way  of  showing  their 
attachment  to  Mr.  Gladstone  they  have  returned  as  member 
for  Kilkenny  a  member  of  the  Carlton  Club.  I  don't  say 
that  we  are  very  proud  of  him,  but  the  irony  of  Irish  affairs 
could  hardly  be  carried  further  than  by  the  selection  of 
Sir  John  Pope  Hennessy,  who  sat  as  a  Conservative  in  the 
House  of  Commons,  and  owed  his  diplomatic  promotion  to 
Lord  Beaconsfield,  and  whom  I  heard  not  many  months 
ago  speak  of  himself  in  an  after-dinner  speech  as  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Conservative  party.  Well,  sir,  these  pleasant 
and  amusing  incidents  of  domestic  differences  will  of  course 
be  soon  forgotten,  but  there  are  a  good  many  things  that 
will  not  be  so  easily  forgotten.  We  have  heard  some  very 
plain  speaking  with  regard  to  their  own  companions  from 
members  of  the  Parnellite  party ;  we  have  heard  Mr.  Par- 
nelTs  description  of  Mr.  Gladstone.  We  have  heard  from 
Mr.  Parnell  that  "that  grand  old  Spider  "  —these,  I  beg 
you  to  observe,  are  all  quotations—"  who  is  the  unrivalled 
coercionist  of  the  Irish  race  "  is  a  "  garrulous  old  gentle- 
man "  whom  Mr.  Parnell  has  known  for  many  years,  but 
from  whom  he  "  could  never  get  a  definite  answer  to  any 
question  that  he  ever  asked."  We  have  heard  Mr.  Par- 
nell 's  description  of  his  own  companions  and  late  sup- 
porters in  the  House  of  Commons,  from  Mr.  Healy,  who 
had  the  distinction  of  being  described  in  Committee  Room 
No.  15  as  "  that  coward.y  little  scoundrel  in  the  corner," 
down  to  Dr.  Tanner,  upon  whom  has  been  bestowed  the 
sobriquet  of  a  "  gutter  sparrow."  We  have  heard  what 
the  leader  thought  of  his  followers,  and  we  have  heard 
with  equal  plainness  what  the  followers  thought  of  their 
leader ;  and  if  I  do  not  go  on  with  quotations  from  their 
speeches,  it  is  only  because,  while  what  the  leaders  say 


1886-90]  THE  WOMAN   IN  THE  CASE  293 

may  be  of  some  importance,  what  the  followers  say  is  of 
no  consequence  to  anybody.1 

Lord  Morley  has  told  me  that  the  last  time  he  talked 
with  his  old  chief  on  political  matters  Mr.  Gladstone  said, 
"  We  should  have  carried  Home  Rule  but  for  Kitty 
O'Shea."  I  once  said  to  David  Plunket,  "  I  knew  I  was 
throwing  a  bombshell  into  the  Irish  camp,  but  I  did  not 
know  it  would  do  quite  so  much  mischief."  "  Ah,"  said 
he,  "  you  didn't  know  that  when  it  burst  they  would  pick 
up  the  pieces  and  cut  each  other's  throats  with  them." 

1  Public  Speeches,  1890-1900,  p.  3. 


20 


CHAPTER   XXIII 

QUIET  POLITICS  AND  A  NOTABLE  CASE  :     1891-1892 

THE  immediate  political  consequence  of  the  Parnell  divorce 
case  and  the  break  up  of  his  party  was  that  the  Ministry 
continued  in  office  for  another  year  and  a  half.  If  that  case 
had  not  been  tried,  I  have  no  doubt  that  the  Government 
would  have  broken  down  in  the  autumn  session,  and  a  General 
Election  would  have  taken  place  directly  after  Christmas. 
Instead  of  that  Parliament  only  sat  for  a  fortnight,  and 
when  it  reassembled  late  in  January  1891,  all  parliamentary 
difficulties  had  disappeared,  and  ministers  found  them- 
selves in  enjoyment  of  a  strength  and  freedom  which  had 
not  belonged  to  them  at  any  time  since  they  entered  office. 
The  opportunity  was  well  used.  The  Tithes  Bill  was  passed. 
Free  Education  was  established.  And  a  valuable  Irish 
Land  Purchase  Act  was  added  to  the  Statute  Book.  Mr. 
Gladstone  came  to  the  House  but  little.  But  on  each  of 
these  Bills  his  followers  challenged  important  divisions,  and 
in  contrast  with  the  scanty  majorities  of  the  preceding  year, 
they  were  beaten  by  majorities  of  94,  101,  and  138,  all  the 
Nationalist  members  who  came  to  the  House  supporting 
the  Government  upon  the  last-named  Bill.  Nor  was  there 
any  trouble  about  Finance.  The  country  was  prosperous, 
and  its  prosperity  was  reflected  in  the  yield  of  taxation. 
Mr.  Goschen  had  done  more  than  justify  his  acceptance  as 
a  Unionist  minister.  He  had  been  a  tower  of  strength  in 
debate;  and  in  five  years,  while  taxes  were  reduced  and  the 
naval  and  military  forces  of  the  country  substantially 
strengthened,  the  National  Debt  had  been  reduced  by 

294 


1891-2]  TRANBY  CROFT  295 

£37,000,000,  and  brought  to  a  lower  point  than  it  had  reached 
for  forty  years. 

I  need  say  no  more  about  the  political  affairs  of  this 
year,  and  will  turn  at  once  to  the  case  which  at  one  time 
threatened  to  have  consequences  in  England  as  grave  as 
those  which  in  Ireland  had  followed  upon  the  Parnell 
divorce. 

It  arose  from  a  charge  of  cheating  at  cards  which  had 
been  made  against  Sir  William  Gordon-Cumming  at  Tranby 
Croft  in  the  previous  September,  when  the  Prince  of  Wales 
was  staying  there  for  the  Doncaster  races,  and  where  Sir 
William,  at  the  suggestion  of  the  Prince,  had  been  included 
in  the  house-party.  It  is  not  necessary  to  recite  here  the 
names  of  the  members  of  that  party. 

The  incidents  did  none  of  them  any  credit ;  and  those  who 
wish  to  read  the  details  will  find  them  all  fully  set  out  in 
the  newspapers  of  the  first  week  of  June  1891.  On  the  night 
that  the  accusation  was  made  Sir  William,  strongly  denying 
his  guilt,  was  persuaded,  under  great  pressure,  to  sign  an 
undertaking  not  to  play  cards  again.  All  the  members  of 
the  party  save  one  were  bound  to  secrecy,  none  of  them 
having  the  sense  to  see  that  the  sudden  departure  of  Sir 
William  from  Tranby  Croft,  and  his  abandonment  of  card- 
playing,  would  effectually  secure  the  publicity  of  the  scandal. 

It  was  all  known  the  next  day,  for  a  lady  who  was  not  at 
Tranby  Croft  heard  the  story  on  Doncaster  race-course. 

On  February  6th,  1891,  Sir  William  Gordon-Cumming 
issued  a  writ  for  slander  against  the  persons  who  had 
accused  him  at  Tranby  Croft,  and  the  defence  put  in  was 
that  the  charge  was  true. 

I  was  instructed  by  Messrs.  Wontner  to  appear  for  the 
plaintiff,  and  had  the  good  fortune  to  have  as  my  junior  my 
good  friend  Charles  Gill,  one  of  the  ablest  and  most  coura- 
geous of  advocates,  a  wise  adviser,  and  a  genial  companion. 
I  need  hardly  say  that  our  consultations  were  long  and 
anxious. 

A  short  time  before  the  case  came  on  Mr.  George  Lewis, 
who  was  the  solicitor  for  all  the  defendants,  came  to  me  with 


296    QUIET  POLITICS  AND  A  NOT  ABLE  CASE  [CHAP,  xxin 

a  message  from  Marlborough  House.  Sir  Edward  Hulse 
had  given  the  Prince  of  Wales  a  box  containing  the  cards 
and  counters  to  be  used  in  playing  baccarat.  The  counters 
were  large  and  of  bright  colours.  On  one  side  was  the  value 
— £10,  £5,  £i,  or  IDS. — on  the  other  the  feathers  of  the 
Prince  of  Wales.  These  were  the  cards  and  counters  used 
on  the  evening  of  the  alleged  cheating.  Mr.  Lewis  told  me 
that  it  would  be  unpleasant  for  the  Prince  that  it  should 
be  known  that  he  travelled  about  with  this  box,  and  asked 
if  I  would  be  content  if  the  defendants  produced  for  use  at 
the  trial  counters  of  the  same  size  and  colour,  but  without 
the  gilt  feathers  on  the  back.  I  told  him  I  could  make  no 
promise  of  concealment,  but  for  the  purpose  of  my  opening 
speech  I  should  be  quite  willing  to  use  the  plain  counters. 
So  I  went  one  afternoon  to  Marlborough  House,  and  saw  Sir 
Francis  Knollys,  and  compared  the  originals  with  the  copies, 
some  of  which  I  still  possess. 

On  the  day  of  the  trial  the  court  had  a  strange  appear- 
ance. Lord  Coleridge  had  appropriated  half  of  the  public 
gallery,  and  had  given  tickets  to  his  friends.  The  Prince 
of  Wales  occupied  a  chair  at  the  front  of  the  bench,  between 
the  judge  and  the  witness  box.  Lady  Coleridge  sat  close 
to  her  husband's  right  hand,  and  had  the  duty  of  checking 
the  occasional  inclination  to  sleep  which  at  this  time  had 
become  noticeable.  The  rest  of  the  bench  was  filled  by  a 
group  of  fashionable  ladies,  in  front  of  whom,  and  one 
might  fitly  say  "  close  to  the  footlights,"  one  of  the  judge's 
daughters-in-law  sat  with  sketch-book  on  her  knee  busily 
sketching  the  actors  in  the  drama.  Lord  Coleridge's  angry 
exclamation  when  the  crowded  court  cheered  my  closing 
speech,  "  Silence,  this  is  not  a  theatre,"  sounded  in  the 
circumstances  rather  amusing. 

I  was  not  a  little  indignant  when,  after  the  trial,  the 
sketch-book  was  brought  to  me  with  a  request  that  I  would 
put  my  signature  to  the  sketch  of  myself  which  was 
inserted  between  the  signed  likenesses  of  Sir  Charles  Russell 
and  Mr.  Asquith. 

I  believe  my  reply  in  this  case  was  one  of  the  best 


1891-2]  A  JUDICIAL  ADVOCATE  297 

speeches  I  ever  made.  It  has  sometimes  happened  to  me 
when  making  a  speech — on  rare  occasions — perhaps  a  dozen 
times  in  the  course  of  my  life — to  have  all  the  faculties  so 
working  together  at  the  very  height  of  their  powers  that 
there  has  ceased  to  be  the  slightest  sense  of  effort,  physical 
or  intellectual.  No  choice  of  topics,  no  hesitation  of 
thought,  no  selection  of  phrase.  As  the  thought  comes 
into  the  mind  the  perfectly  apt  word  comes  with  it.  The 
phrase  has  no  ambiguity  and  no  extravagance.  And  voice 
and  gesture  instinctively  give  melody  and  force  to  the 
flowing  period. 

It  is  an  intense  enjoyment  to  the  speaker,  and  I  never 
felt  its  delight  so  fully  as  when  I  was  delivering  that  closing 
speech. 

Lord  Coleridge  said  at  the  beginning  of  his  summing  up 
that  perhaps  it  was  as  well  that  a  night  had  intervened 
between  my  speech  and  the  summing  up.  He  had  made 
the  most  of  the  interval.  He  told  Lady  Coleridge  when  he 
reached  home  that  until  he  heard  my  reply  he  had  never 
doubted  what  the  result  of  the  case  would  be.  And  he  set 
to  work  that  night  to  prepare,  or  perhaps  to  complete,  the 
very  fine  specimen  of  judicial  advocacy  which  he  delivered 
the  next  morning. 

It  has  often  been  a  subject  of  discussion  among  lawyers 
whether  Charles  Russell  or  John  Duke  Coleridge  was  the 
greater  advocate.  I  am  not  sure  that  Russell  was  quite 
at  his  best  in  the  Baccarat  case,  but  so  far  as  that  case  was 
concerned  I  think  no  careful  student  of  the  trial  would 
deny  the  supremacy  to  Coleridge. 

The  result  of  the  case  greatly  disappointed  me.  I  had 
opened  it  in  language  of  studied  moderation,  for  I  thought 
it  possible  that  when  Sir  William's  evidence  had  been  given 
the  defendants  would  say  that  they  accepted  his  denial, 
and  would  withdraw  their  idea  of  justification.  That  course 
would  not  have  saved  my  client  from  social  ostracism.  He 
had  made  many  enemies ;  and  Society,  with  the  leader  of 
Society  at  its  head,  would  have  refused  to  receive  him. 
But  it  might  have  saved  him,  and  the  loyal  and  devoted 


298    QUIET  POLITICS  AND  A  NOT  ABLE  CASE  [CHAP,  xxm 

lady,  who  in  the  hour  of  his  disgrace  became  his  wife, 
and  the  innocent  children  of  their  marriage,  from  the 
shameful  cruelty  with  which  in  later  years  they  were 
pursued. 

Any  counsel  of  experience  distrusts  his  own  judgment 
upon  the  merits  of  a  case  in  which  he  has  himself  been  an  ad- 
vocate. But  so  many  years  have  passed  since  the  Baccarat 
case  was  tried  that  I  think  I  am  able  now  to  form  an 
unbiased  opinion,  and  I  think  I  ought  to  leave  that  opinion 
on  record. 

I  believe  the  verdict  was  wrong,  and  that  Sir  William 
Gordon-Gumming  was  innocent  of  the  offence  charged 
against  him. 

The  Session  of  1892  was  very  quiet.  Some  members 
were  away,  preparing  for  the  General  Election  which  it  was 
known  would  come  in  the  autumn,  some  were  careless,  for 
they  did  not  intend  to  stand  again.  The  Liberal  leaders 
were  divided,  the  Irish  party  was  broken  in  two,  and  the 
Government  had  no  immediate  anxieties. 

But  in  that  session  I  delivered  three  speeches  which  I 
think  should  be  mentioned  here.  The  first  was  upon  the 
Salvation  Army.  I  had  enjoyed  for  some  years  the  friend- 
ship and  confidence  of  General  Booth,  the  wonderful  man 
whose  devout  enthusiasm  and  genius  for  organisation  con- 
verted a  local  evangelistic  effort  in  an  industrial  town  in 
the  north  of  England  into  the  world-wide  movement  which 
has  done  so  much  to  promote  Christian  faith  and  conduct 
among  the  poor  and  unlearned  of  every  nation.  When 
General  Booth  came  to  London  I  was  professionally  con- 
sulted upon  some  troublesome  legal  questions  which  arose 
in  connection  with  the  establishment  of  the  London  head- 
quarters at  the  Eagle  Tavern  in  the  City  Road.  Some  years 
later  I  argued  for  them  and  won  the  case  of  Beaty  v.  Gil- 
banks,  which  established  their  right  to  have  public  proces- 
sions and  to  have  those  processions  protected  against 
interruption ;  and  thenceforward  to  the  end  of  his  long  and 
useful  life  I  had  the  privilege  of  being  his  adviser  upon 
important  questions  of  law.  In  1891  a  by-law  which 


1891-2]  THE  SALVATION   ARMY  299 

enabled  the  town  council  at  Eastbourne  to  prohibit  the  use 
of  a  band  in  the  Salvation  Army  processions  was  inadver- 
tently sanctioned  by  Parliament.  Serious  disorders  took 
place,  and  in  1892  a  Bill  was  introduced  by  the  Govern- 
ment to  repeal  this  by-law.  The  Bill  passed  without 
difficulty;  and  in  the  debate  I  took  occasion  to  declare 
that  the  Salvation  Army  was  so  far  as  I  knew  the  only 
religious  organisation  which  the  world  has  ever  seen  which 
makes  the  only  test  of  membership  personal  purity  and 
holiness  of  life.  I  said,  "  Any  one  who  knows  anything  of 
the  Salvation  Army  knows  this  cardinal  fact  that  every 
one  of  the  hundreds  of  thousands  of  persons  who  join  it 
becomes  an  abstainer  from  all  intoxicants,  and  also,  which 
often  involves  a  greater  self-denial,  an  abstainer  from 
the  use  of  tobacco  in  any  form,  and  any  one  knowing  that 
realises  the  extraordinary  importance  and  value  of  this 
religious  organisation." 

This  earned  for  me  a  caricature  in  Punch  of  March  igth, 
1892,  which  gave  me  the  greatest  pleasure.  My  friend 
Harry  Furniss,  the  greatest  draughtsman  and  caricaturist 
of  his  time,  represented  me  in  Salvation  Army  uniform 
dancing  along  and  vigorously  clashing  a  pair  of  cymbals. 

The  second  of  the  three  speeches  was  delivered  as  the 
spokesman  of  the  Government  and  the  Tory  party  in 
opposition  to  a  resolution  in  favour  of  the  disestablishment 
of  the  Church  in  Wales.1 

The  third  was  an  authorised  declaration  of  the  policy 
of  the  Government  with  regard  to  franchise  and  regis- 
tration reform.  A  small  committee  had  been  appointed, 
consisting  of  the  Solicitor-General  for  Scotland  and  myself 
and  one  other,  to  make  a  report  upon  the  system  of  regis- 
tration in  England  and  in  Scotland,  and  this  having  been 
considered  by  the  Cabinet  I  was  commissioned  to  state 
their  views.  I  have  not  reprinted  this  speech,  which  was 
delivered  on  May  25th,  1892,  and  will  be  found  in  Hansard, 
series  4,  vol.  iv,  p.  1829 ;  but  for  twenty-five  years  Parlia- 
ment has  neglected  the  subject,  and  it  may  be  worth  while 

1  Selected  Speeches,  p.  173. 


300    QUIET  POLITICS  AND  A  NOTABLE  CASE  [CHAP,  xxm 

to  note  the  proposals  which  Lord  Salisbury  and  his  col- 
leagues were  prepared  to  accept. 

The  principle  laid  down  was  that  it  should  be  made  as 
easy  as  possible  for  any  man  qualified  by  law  to  exercise 
the  franchise ;  that  his  name  should  be  put  on  the  electoral 
list  by  the  action  of  a  public  officer ;  and  that  when  once 
there  it  should  not  be  allowed  to  disappear  from  the  list  so 
long  as  he  continues  to  hold  a  qualification.  Successive 
occupation  should  be  allowed  from  one  borough  to 
another,  and  not  only  within  the  limits  of  a  borough. 
The  Scottish  system  should  be  adopted  ;  the  system  of 
revising  barristers,  and  the  direct  influence  of  political 
partisans  on  the  formation  of  the  electoral  roll  should  be 
abolished ;  and  the  record  from  which  the  names  of  voters 
are  taken  should  be  a  record  which  is  not  connected 
with  parliamentary  and  political  purposes  only,  but  is 
connected  also  with  liability  to  rating  and  other  public 
liabilities  and  duties. 

I  hope  this  speech  may  yet  be  found  of  use  when  the 
manifold  evils  of  the  present  system  of  registration  come 
to  be  seriously  dealt  with. 

The  Parliament  went  quietly  on  to  its  close ;  and  the 
dissolution  in  July  1892  brought  me  a  harder  contest  at 
Plymouth  than  I  had  expected.  This  was  owing  to  a  curious 
blunder  by  the  authorities  at  the  Admiralty.  For  some 
years  the  representatives  of  dockyard  constituencies  had 
been  urging  on  successive  Governments  the  reasonable 
claim  of  the  shipwrights  to  an  increase  in  their  wages,  which 
had  been  fixed  long  ago,  and  were  lower  than  the  wages 
given  in  private  yards. 

In  1892  Lord  George  Hamilton,  who  recognised  the 
justice  of  the  claim,  and  did  not  disregard  the  party  advan- 
tage which  might  be  gained  by  a  concession,  persuaded  the 
Government  to  authorise  a  further  expenditure  of  £96,000 
a  year,  which  would  suffice  to  give  an  increase  of  2s.  a  week 
to  all  the  shipwrights.  Unfortunately  the  Secretary  to  the 
Admiralty,  Mr.  Arthur  Forwood,  a  Liverpool  shipowner, 
persuaded  him  to  approve  a  scheme  by  which  the  ship- 


i8gi-2]  A  COSTLY   BLUNDER  301 

wrights  were  divided  into  three  classes,  receiving  respectively 
increases  of  one  shilling,  two  shillings,  and  three  shillings, 
according  to  their  length  of  service.  This  pleased  no  one. 
There  was  indeed  no  justice  in  it,  for  it  was  the  men  who 
had  young  families  to  bring  up  who  needed  most  the  larger 
wage ;  and  all  classes  resented  the  distinction  made  between 
them. 

I  came  to  London  during  the  election  to  see  if  the  mistake 
could  be  repaired,  but  the  increase  of  35.  to  the  older  men 
having  been  once  announced  could  not  be  withdrawn  ;  we 
went  to  the  poll  with  the  majority  of  the  angry  ship- 
wrights voting  against  us  ;  and  although  I  headed  the  poll, 
and  my  new  colleague  Sir  William  Pearce  was  returned 
with  me,  I  only  beat  the  strongest  opponent  by  160  votes — 
a  disappointing  contrast  to  the  886  of  six  years  before. 

Elsewhere  the  effect  of  the  blunder  was  much  more 
serious.  At  Devonport  we  lost  both  seats,  at  Portsmouth 
one,  and  another  at  the  Pembroke  Boroughs. 

When  the  new  Parliament  met  in  January  of  1893  Glad- 
stone had  a  majority  of  39.  Of  the  English  representatives 
the  majority  against  him  was  71.  With  a  House  of  Com- 
mons so  constituted  I  doubt  if  any  one  but  he  really  thought 
it  possible  to  place  a  Home  Rule  Act  upon  the  Statute  Book. 
If  the  majority  had  been  only  31  the  gallant  old  fighter 
would  hardly  have  prevailed  on  his  followers  to  make 
the  attempt. 

My  six  years  of  office  as  Solicitor-General  came  to  an 
end  on  August  i8th,  1892. 


CHAPTER    XXIV 

THE   FRONT  OPPOSITION   BENCH  I     1892-1895 

THE  first  use  I  made  of  my  recovered  freedom  was  to  pay  a 
visit  to  Ireland.  I  had  long  felt  ashamed  that  while  we  in 
the  House  of  Commons  were  constantly  discussing  Irish 
affairs,  so  few  of  us  had  any  personal  knowledge  of  the 
country  and  its  people.  So  after  a  week  or  two  of  pleasant 
boating  and  tennis  at  Staines,  I  went  off  with  my  wife  and 
daughter  and  my  eldest  son  to  spend  a  few  weeks  in  enjoy- 
ing lovely  scenery  and  a  delightful  people. 

We  stayed  for  a  while  in  Dublin,  in  excellent  rooms  at 
the  Shelbourne  Hotel,  where  we  met  many  friends  and  made 
pleasant  new  ones,  and  then  we  had  a  never-to-be-forgotten 
week  of  enjoyment  at  Glengarriff ,  surely  one  of  the  loveliest 
places  on  earth.  Then  came  Killarney,  famed  for  its  beauty 
and  worthy  of  all  its  fame.  I  shall  never  forget  the  brilliant 
autumn  day  when  my  son  and  I  took  a  merry  guide  and 
went  to  the  top  of  Mangerton,  and  heard  the  story  of  the 
bottomless  lake,  and  drank  "  God  Save  Ireland  "  in  some 
special  Irish  whisky  for  which  a  house  we  had  passed  on 
the  road  was  famed. 

We  sojourned  for  a  while  at  Cork,  at  Limerick,  and  at 
Bray  ;  and  my  son  and  I  made  a  special  trip  to  see  the  New 
Tipperary,  which  was  the  one  constructive  experiment  of 
the  Nationalist  movement.  And  we  came  back  to  Dublin 
in  time  to  witness  from  the  windows  of  the  Imperial  Hotel 
in  Sackville  Street  the  great  procession  that  went  to 
Glasnevin  Cemetery  on  the  first  anniversary  of  ParnelTs 
death. 

I  am  reluctant  to  quote  from  my  own  speeches,  but  I  do 
not  think  I  can  describe  that  procession  and  what  appeared 

[302 


1892-4]  A  GREAT   PROCESSION  303 

to  me  to  be  its  political  significance  better  than  by  tran- 
scribing a  passage  from  my  speech  at  Plymouth  on 
January  3rd,  1893. 

I  had  an  opportunity  while  in  Ireland  of  considering  a 
very  interesting  question  in  that  country  now,  and  that 
is  the  question  of  the  relative  strength  of  the  two  parties 
which  claim  between  them  to  represent  the  Nationalist 
cause  of  Ireland — I  mean  the  Parnellites  and  those  who  by 
a  curious  and  inexcusable  blunder  have  allowed  themselves 
to  be  called  anti-Parnellites.  I  had  an  interesting  oppor- 
tunity of  observing  the  strength  of  the  Parnellite  party  in 
the  chief  city  of  Ireland. 

On  October  9th  a  procession  took  place  through  Dublin 
to  Glasnevin  Cemetery  in  commemoration  of  the  death  of 
Mr.  Parnell,  and  from  a  balcony  in  Sackville  Street  I  watched 
that  procession.  It  was  a  most  remarkable  sight  on  a  most 
remarkable  day.  The  priests  of  the  distant  parts  of  Ireland 
had  set  themselves  to  thwart,  if  they  could,  the  intention 
to  hold  that  great  demonstration.  They  had  refused  in 
more  than  one  place  to  celebrate  early  mass,  in  the  hope 
that  that  refusal  would  prevent  the  people  being  able  to 
go  by  train  to  Dublin  to  take  part  in  that  procession.  But 
on  that  Sunday  morning  every  quarter  of  an  hour  from  ten 
o'clock  in  the  morning  until  half-past  twelve,  at  each  of 
the  railway  stations  in  Dublin,  special  trains  were  arriving 
from  the  country,  bringing  thousands  of  people  to  join  in 
the  tribute  to  Mr.  Parnell' s  memory. 

All  those  people  were  coming  in  wearing  bunches  of  ivy 
leaves,  which  have  now  become  in  Ireland  the  recognised 
sign  of  adherents  to  Parnellism.  The  streets  grew  gradually 
more  and  more  thronged  in  the  morning,  and  at  midday 
there  were  dense  crowds  all  over  Sackville  Street  to  the 
O'Connell  bridge. 

The  most  remarkable  thing  was  that  there  was  not  a 
policeman  to  be  seen.  The  crowd  was  in  perfect  order,  but 
we  wondered  how  the  procession  would  make  its  way. 

Presently  came  the  procession.  Four  men  in  front  of  it 
with  wands  bound  in  black  and  white  were  enough  to  make 
way  through  the  crowd. 

The  car  piled  with  wreaths  passed  on,  the  Parnellite 
members  walking  bareheaded  after  it,  and  then  came  for 
an  hour  and  a  quarter  persons  walking  in  procession. 


304        THE  FRONT  OPPOSITION  BENCH      [CHAP,  xxiv 

I  cannot  say  with  certainty,  but,  from  experiment  made 
at  different  times,  I  should  think  there  were  ten  or  eleven 
thousand  persons  walking  in  that  procession.  But  the 
importance  of  the  matter  was  in  the  crowds  that  filled  the 
streets,  and  that  almost  everywhere  you  saw  an  ivy  leaf  in 
the  coat  which  admitted  the  wearer  to  be  a  follower  of 
Parnell.  The  remarkable  thing  about  Irish  politics  to  me 
at  this  moment  is  this :  that  while  what  is  called  the  Par- 
nellite  party  in  Ireland  is  now  but  small  in  the  House  of 
Commons — nine  or  ten  in  number — their  opponents  have,  by 
a  singular  and  inexplicable  fatuity,  handed  over  to  them 
the  whole  of  the  sentiment  connected  with  the  Nationalist 
cause  in  Ireland. 

There  is  Parnell' s  grave  in  Glasnevin  Cemetery  to  which 
thousands  of  people  go,  and  which  is  the  great  object  of 
observation,  and  there  is  the  wearing  of  the  ivy  leaf.  It  may 
be  the  priests  will  be  too  strong  for  Parnellism.  I  don't 
think  they  will.  There  is  no  more  sentimental  people  in 
the  world  than  the  Irish  people,  and  their  sentiments  now 
are  associated  with  Parnell  and  his  history  and  his  triumphs 
in  the  House  of  Commons  in  a  way  which  I  do  not  think 
will  ever  be  defeated. 

But  if  the  priests  do  not  succeed  in  crushing  Parnellism, 
I  am  quite  sure  that  Parnellism  will  conquer  the  opponents 
whom  it  will  find  in  Ireland.  It  was  said  the  other  day  by 
one  of  the  representatives  of  the  anti-Parnellite  party  that 
the  Parnellites  have  no  capable  men  among  them.  I  read 
the  assertion  with  great  surprise,  for  undoubtedly  in  Mr. 
John  Redmond  the  Parnellites  have  the  most  able  parlia- 
mentary speaker  amongst  those  who  now  represent  Ireland 
in  the  House  of  Commons.1 


In  order  to  complete  the  account  of  this  visit  to  Ireland 
I  must  add  a  few  more  sentences  from  the  same  speech. 

During  those  three  weeks  I  determinedly  did  not  see  an 
English  newspaper. 

I  read  only  the  newspapers  that  one  found  in  the  country, 
and  one  of  the  most  curious  things  was  that  during  the 
whole  time  I  was  there,  and  taking  all  the  local  newspapers 

1  Public  Speeches,  1890-1900,  p.  37. 


1892-5]  POPULAR  POLITICS  305 

to  which  I  had  access,  I  do  not  think  I  ever  saw  any  refer- 
ence to  the  establishment  of  an  Irish  Parliament. 

The  people  over  there  do  not  seem  to  look  upon  that  as 
one  of  the  serious  questions  with  which  they  are  dealing. 
I  do  not  say  that  the  casual  observations  of  the  people 
one  meets  in  various  parts  of  Ireland  can  be  accepted  as 
an  altogether  trustworthy  indication  of  public  feeling ; 
but  I  am  bound  to  say  I  was  struck  with  the  observation 
of  a  car-driver  driving  me  to  Killarney.  Of  course  that 
driver — and  he  was  tempted  by  me  I  am  afraid — indulged 
me  with  a  most  enthusiastic  description  of  the  merits  of 
Mr.  Gladstone.  He  was  indeed  among  Mr.  Gladstone's 
most  enthusiastic  supporters.  He  told  me  that  he  was 
the  most  wonderful  man  that  ever  lived,  that  there  had  not 
been  a  thought  of  his  life  that  had  not  been  given  to  justice 
to  Ireland  ;  and  he  spoke  of  the  magnificent  things  which 
that  splendid  statesman  had  done  and  intended  to  do.  So 
I  fell  in  with  his  humour,  and  I  said,  "  And  now  you're  all 
right  as  he  is  in  office,  and  in  six  months  he  will  be  giving 
you  an  Irish  Parliament."  "Oh,  God  forbid,"  he  said; 
"  that  would  make  things  worse  than  ever."  He  would 
have  nothing  to  do  with  an  Irish  Parliament  at  all.  "  What 
they  want,"  said  he,  "  is  not  to  pay  rent."  I  believe 
that  the  most  complete  expression  of  the  general  desire 
and  feeling  of  the  Irish  people  that  I  came  across  in  that 
time  was  put  in  plain  terms  by  another  car-driver.  He 
said,  "  What  people  want  is  to  pay  no  rent  and  have  com- 
pensation for  improvements."  Well,  travelling  in  Ireland, 
reading  the  local  papers,  hearing  local  opinions,  talking  to 
people  about  politics,  one  could  see  at  once  that  there  was 
no  question  as  to  the  establishment  of  a  Parliament,  or  of 
an  executive  responsible  to  Parliament,  or  anything  of  that 
kind.  They  had  their  grievances,  or  thought  they  had  them, 
with  regard  to  the  terms  of  their  holdings,  they  were  all 
eager  to  become  the  owners  of  the  holdings  which  they 
tilled,  and  the  conclusion  which  was  borne  in  on  my  mind 
is  that  the  whole  secret  of  the  Irish  question  is  this  security 
and  tenure  of  occupation  of  land,  and  that  if  the  policy 
which  we  carried  out  in  Lord  Ashbourne's  Act  for  enabling 
tenants  of  farms  to  become  on  easy  terms  proprietors  of 
their  holdings  were  steadily  carried  through  we  should  so  wipe 
out  the  question  of  Nationalist  aspirations  for  a  Parliament.1 
1  Public  Speeches,  1890-1900,  p.  36. 


306         THE  FRONT  OPPOSITION  BENCH      [CHAP,  xxiv 

It  was  soon  announced  that  Sir  Charles  Russell  and  Mr. 
John  Rigby  were  to  be  the  new  Law  Officers,  and  that  they 
had  acquiesced  in  a  rule  that  they  should  take  no  private 
practice  except  in  the  House  of  Lords  and  the  Judicial  Com- 
mittee of  the  Privy  Council ;  an  exception  which  was  of  no 
importance  to  Russell,  as  he  seldom  appeared  in  either 
place.  A  curious  little  note  from  him  reached  me  on 
August  i8th. 

MY  DEAR  CLARKE, 

Mr.  G.  in  appointing  his  Law  Officers  finds  he  is  con- 
fronted with  a  rule  laid  down  by  the  late  Government 
against  the  Law  Officer  taking  (with  certain  exceptions)  any 
private  practice.  Pray  let  me  know  your  understanding 
of  that  rule. 

I  envy  your  freedom  ! 

Yours  faithfully, 

C.  RUSSELL. 

He  put  the  same  question  to  Lord  Halsbury  and  to 
Webster,  and  was  told  by  both  of  them  that  no  such  rule 
had  been  laid  down. 

My  reply  to  his  letter  was  : 

MY  DEAR  RUSSELL, 

No  such  rule  as  you  mention  was  laid  down  by  the 
late  Government ;  Webster  and  I  were  not  subject  to  any 
restrictions  whatever  in  the  matter  of  private  business, 
nor  should  I  have  submitted  to  any.  I  think  it  is  a  pity 
you  and  Rigby  have  consented  to  take  office  on  other  terms, 
but  I  look  on  this  consent  as  simply  a  matter  of  personal 
arrangement  between  yourselves  and  Mr.  Gladstone,  and 
not  as  establishing  a  rule  by  which  others  will  be  bound. 

Very  faithfully  yours, 
EDWARD  CLARKE. 

Charles  Russell  was  furious ;  he  declared  Mr.  Gladstone 
had  deceived  him,  and  claimed  to  be  relieved  of  the  restric- 
tion. The  Lord  Chancellor  (Herschell)  brought  the  matter 
before  the  Cabinet,  but  they  were  firm. 

The  new  arrangement  did  not  prove  a  success  from  the 


1892-5]  AN   EASIER  LIFE  307 

point  of  view  of  public  economy,  and  Russell  soon  found  he 
had  nothing  to  complain  of. 

In  1891  his  income  had  been  a  little  under  £14,000  ; 
during  the  period  of  rather  less  than  two  years,  from  August 
1892  to  May  1894,  he  received  from  the  Treasury  something 
over  £32,000,  being  an  annual  income  of  nearly  twice  the 
average  amount  of  public  money  received  by  the  Attorney- 
General  during  the  previous  twenty  years. 

As  soon  as  I  left  office  my  clerk  came  to  me  and  sug- 
gested that  I  should  now  relax  the  rule  I  had  laid  down  of 
not  accepting  a  brief  with  less  than  a  hundred  guineas. 
He  thought  that  as  a  private  counsel  I  could  not  prudently 
try  to  maintain  it.  I  told  him  I  was  not  very  anxious 
about  the  amount  of  my  income,  and  felt  sure  I  should 
earn  sufficient  for  my  needs,  and  that  after  six  years  of  very 
hard  work  I  should  not  be  sorry  to  have  a  time  of  more 
leisure.  He  was  gloomy  and  apprehensive  ;  but  his  appre- 
hensions were  very  far  from  being  justified. 

The  meeting  of  Parliament  in  February  1893  was  the 
beginning  of  the  most  enjoyable  period  of  my  political  life. 
The  front  Opposition  bench  is  by  far  the  pleasantest  place 
in  the  House.  I  was  no  longer  bound  to  constant  attend- 
ance on  the  debates.  The  escape  from  the  onerous  obli- 
gation of  being  in  my  place  during  the  last  half-hour  of 
every  sitting  was  an  especial  relief.  I  had  of  course  to 
surrender  my  occupancy  of  the  Solicitor-General's  room; 
but  the  authorities  of  the  House  were  very  kind,  and  gave 
me  the  use  of  a  small  room  close  to  a  private  exit  under 
an  arch  of  the  Speaker's  courtyard,  where,  so  long  as  I  re- 
mained a  member  of  Parliament,  I  was  enabled,  secure  from 
interruption,  to  do  a  great  deal  of  my  legal  work.  Best 
of  all  was  the  fact  that  now,  as  in  the  party  out  of  office 
there  are  no  Cabinet  secrets,  I  was  admitted  to  the  fullest 
confidence  of  my  leaders,  and  was  entrusted  with  some  very 
important  duties.  On  three  occasions,  once  in  each  of  the 
three  years  that  the  Government  lasted,  I  was  chosen  to  lead 
the  opposition  to  an  important  Bill. 

The  first,  and  by  far  the  most  important  of  these,  was  the 


308         THE  FRONT  OPPOSITION  BENCH      [CHAP,  xxiv 

introduction  of  the  second  Home  Rule  Bill  by  Mr.  Gladstone 
on  February  I3th,  1893 ;  the  anniversary  of  the  day  thirteen 
years  before  when  I  had  been  elected  for  Southwark.  When 
the  date  of  this  introduction  was  fixed,  Mr.  Balfour  spoke 
to  me  about  the  debate.  He  did  not  propose  to  divide 
against  the  first  reading ;  but  he  said  he  wished  to  have  a 
full  debate,  well  sustained,  for  several  nights,  and  his  chief 
anxiety  was  as  to  the  first  night.  Everybody,  he  said, 
would  be  willing  to  speak  the  second  night,  after  time  for 
thought  and  consideration,  but  he  wanted  a  good  strong 
fighting  speech  which  would  be  read  on  the  same  day  as 
Mr.  Gladstone's  opening.  Would  I  prepare  myself  to  speak 
on  the  first  evening,  say  at  ten  o'clock  ?  I  agreed  to  speak, 
but  I  suggested  that  I  should  follow  Mr.  Gladstone  im- 
mediately he  sat  down.  I  said  my  training  at  the  Bar  had 
accustomed  me  to  answer  at  once  an  opponent's  argu- 
ments, I  thought  my  speech  would  be  no  better  for  the  two 
or  three  hours'  interval,  and  that  it  would  gain  in  effect 
if  made  directly  the  new  proposals  were  stated.  He  seemed 
surprised  at  the  suggestion,  but  agreed  that  an  immediate 
reply  would  be  the  more  effective,  and  it  was  so  arranged. 

My  first  preparation  for  the  heavy  task  I  had  undertaken 
was  to  get  a  copy  of  the  old  Home  Rule  Bill,  and  absolutely 
learn  it  by  heart,  so  as  to  remember  the  number  and  exact 
terms  of  every  clause.  So  far  as  old  proposals  were  repeated 
I  knew  the  comment  we  had  made  upon  them  seven  years 
before  ;  if  they  were  varied  the  alteration  was  a  concession 
of  previous  mistake  and  the  answer  to  the  new  scheme 
must  be  extemporised.  Then  I  went  down  to  Brighton 
with  Lady  Clarke  for  two  or  three  days,  took  spacious  and 
excellent  rooms  at  the  Grand  Hotel,  worked  diligently  at 
my  notes,  wrote  my  peroration,  and  fixed  its  phrases  in 
my  memory  while  I  walked  up  and  down  the  front,  and 
made  my  usual  excursion  to  look  at  the  house  in  Walsingham 
Terrace,  of  which  I  had  heard  and  said  so  much  in  the 
Parnell  case. 

We  came  back  to  town  on  Monday,  and  in  the  afternoon 
I  walked  down  to  the  House.  Its  precincts  were  full  of 


1892-5]  A  FAMOUS  DEBATE  309 

excitement.  Crowds  loitered  in  Whitehall  and  Downing 
Street  and  round  the  railings  of  Palace  Yard,  and  as  the 
well-known  leaders  passed  into  the  House  their  adherents 
cheered  them. 

As  I  went  up  the  staircase  I  heard  the  roar  of  cheers 
when  the  Prime  Minister  came  to  the  table,  and  when  I 
entered  the  chamber  his  first  sentence  was  stilling  the 
House  to  silence.  It  was  a  wonderful  sight.  The  whole 
House  was  crowded  to  its  limits,  every  seat  occupied, 
rows  of  chairs  ranged  along  the  floor,  all  the  galleries  full, 
and  a  crowd  of  members  who  could  find  no  seats  standing 
massed  at  the  bar.  From  over  the  clock  the  Prince  of 
Wales  and  the  Duke  of  York  watched  the  scene ;  from  the 
rows  right  and  left  of  them  Lord  Rosebery,  Lord  Spencer, 
Lord  Knutsford,  Lord  Rowton,  and  Lord  Cadogan  listened 
to  the  speech. 

The  Reporters'  Gallery  was  crowded ;  and  as  I  went  to  the 
seat  reserved  for  me  between  Mr.  Balfour  and  Mr.  Goschen, 
I  could  not  help  recalling  the  night  twenty-six  years  before, 
when  I  had  stood  in  that  gallery,  and  heard  the  memorable 
speech  which  anticipated,  and  strove  to  avert,  the  fall  of 
a  Liberal  Ministry.  And  now  the  same  speaker,  casting 
aside  the  burden  of  his  eighty-four  years  of  strenuous  life, 
stood  in  the  same  place,  and  with  form  erect,  and  flashing 
eye,  and  voice  which  had  lost  but  little  of  its  strength  and 
music,  poured  out  for  three  hours  the  stream  of  clear  argu- 
ment and  copious  illustration  and  unfaltering  phrase.  It 
was,  as  I  acknowledged  in  my  opening  sentence,  "  a  splendid 
example  of  physical  and  intellectual  power." 

He  sat  down  amidst  a  tumult  of  cheers,  and  then  his 
hearers  began  to  hurry  away.  The  Speaker  could  hardly 
be  heard  when  he  put  the  question,  and  I  had  to  stand  at 
the  table  for  several  minutes  until  the  noise  of  departure 
subsided.  The  next  ten  minutes  was,  I  think,  the  most 
trying  experience  of  my  life — worse  than  my  maiden  speech. 

Our  men  sat  steady,  and  helped  me  by  their  welcome; 
but  from  below  the  gangway,  and  from  the  benches  opposite 
me,  members  were  hastening  out  to  send  telegrams  and 
21 


3to        THE  FRONT  OPPOSITION  BfiNCtt     [CHAP. 

letters  or  to  discuss  the  speech ;  and  I  had  the  discouragement 
of  fearing  that  my  speech  would  be  delivered  to  an  almost 
empty  House.  An  unlooked-for  incident  helped  to  save  me. 
After  a  few  introductory  sentences  on  the  fact  that  in 
in  the  Prime  Minister's  speech  there  had  been  no  reference 
to  the  Land  Question,  Mr.  Gladstone  sprang  to  his  feet. 

I  am  indebted  to  the  hon.  and  learned  gentleman  for  his 
reminder.  I  omitted  to  mention  among  the  provisions  of 
the  Bill  that  the  Land  Question  is  reserved  to  the  Imperial 
Parliament  for  a  period  of  three  years. 

The  news  that  Mr.  Gladstone  had  again  risen  brought 
members  rushing  back  into  the  chamber,  and  now  they 
for  the  most  part  stayed.  My  speech  l  lasted  about  an 
hour,  and  I  had  reason  to  be  proud  of  its  reception. 

The  course  of  the  debates  upon  the  Bill  when  it  reached 
Committee  was  not  at  all  creditable  to  the  leaders  of  the 
Unionist  party.  It  was  not  to  their  interest  that  time 
should  be  occupied  by  long  discussion  on  the  Bill,  for  this 
was  the  only  Bill  in  which  the  Irish  members  were  interested, 
and  without  them  the  Government  had  no  majority  at  all. 
If  the  Unionists  had  concentrated  their  attacks  upon  the 
important  provisions  on  which  the  English  Liberals  were 
themselves  divided,  the  Bill  might  have  been  defeated  in 
the  House  of  Commons.  Instead  of  that  private  members 
were  encouraged  to  put  down  all  the  trivial  amendments 
they  could  think  of,  and  so  divisions  were  taken,  at  times 
when  the  House  was  full,  upon  trumpery  little  questions. 
Worse  still,  prominent  members  of  the  party  voted  for 
proposals  they  were  known  to  disapprove,  in  their  desire 
to  make  more  certain  the  rejection  of  the  Bill  by  the  House 
of  Lords. 

I  made  my  comment  on  this  at  my  next  annual  meeting 
at  Plymouth  on  January  2nd,  1894. 

There  was  one  great  mistake,  to  my  thinking,  made  by 
some  of  the  leaders  of  the  party  to  which  I  belong  in  their 
1  Selected  Speeches,  p.  78. 


1892-5]  BAD  LEADERSHIP  311 

attitude  and  contest  against  the  Home  Rule  Bill.  I 
thought  it  a  mistake  at  the  time.  I  am  more  confirmed  in 
that  opinion  since.  Some  of  our  leaders,  Lord  Randolph 
Churchill  especially,  kept  declaring  that  it  did  not  matter 
what  the  House  of  Commons  did  on  that  subject,  for  the 
House  of  Lords  would  in  any  ease  throw  the  Bill  out. 
I  thought  at  the  time,  and  think  now,  that  that  was  a 
great  tactical  mistake.  In  the  House  of  Commons  we 
ought  to  have  no  consideration  at  all  of  what  the  House  of 
Lords  will  or  will  not  do  with  a  measure  when  it  has  left 
our  House.  In  the  House  of  Commons  it  is  our  business 
to  discuss  the  Bill  and  to  frame  it  as  we  think  it  can  best 
be  framed,  or  to  resist  it  to  the  best  of  our  power  if  we 
think  it  is  a  mischievous  measure. 

When  we  have  done  our  duty  in  the  House  of  Commons 
with  regard  to  the  matter,  then,  and  then  only,  comes  the 
responsibility  of  the  House  of  Lords,  and  then  only  should 
commence  the  reference  to  the  probable  action  of  the 
House  of  Lords.  But  the  mischief  done  was  great.  I  am 
certain  if  there  had  been  no  House  of  Lords  that  Bill  would 
never  have  passed  a  third  reading  in  the  House  of  Commons. 
It  passed  the  third  reading  in  the  shape  that  it  took  because 
many  of  those  who  objected  to  some  of  its  provisions,  and 
who  especially  objected  to  the  retention  of  the  Irish  members 
in  our  Parliament,  saw  there  was  no  chance  of  the  Bill  ever 
passing  into  law  ;  and  they  reconciled  themselves  to  allow- 
ing it  to  pass  in  that  form  because  they  knew  that  the 
House  of  Lords  would  probably  make  an  end  of  the  Bill 
altogether.  Now  I  hope  that  blunder  will  not  be  repeated 
by  any  of  the  leaders  of  our  party  when  we  are  again  deal- 
ing with  a  question  of  great  importance  in  the  House  of 
Commons.1 

The  Home  Rule  Bill  was  thrown  out  in  the  House  of  Lords 
by  the  extraordinary  majority  of  419  against  41.  The 
Prime  Minister  wanted  a  dissolution,  but  was  overruled 
by  his  Cabinet,  and  submitted.  Presently  he  was  over- 
ruled again  on  the  Navy  Estimates,  which  he  wished  to 
reduce.  This  time  he  would  not  submit ;  and  in  March  1894 
Lord  Rosebery  became  Prime  Minister. 

In  May  of  that  year  an  important  Reform  Bill,  having 
1  Public  Speeches,  1890-1900,  p.  45. 


312        THE  FRONT  OPPOSITION  BENCH     [CHAP,  xxiv 

the  awkward  title  of  the  "  Period  of  Qualifications  and 
Elections  Bill/'  was  introduced  by  the  Chief  Secretary  for 
Ireland  (Mr.  John  Morley) ;  and  a  small  committee,  on  which 
I  served,  was  appointed  to  report  on  its  proposals  and  advise 
our  leaders  as  to  the  course  they  should  take.  I  was  com- 
missioned to  lead  for  the  Opposition  in  the  debate,  and 
directly  the  second  reading  was  moved  I  proposed  an 
amendment  declining  to  "  proceed  further  with  a  Bill  con- 
taining provisions  effecting  extensive  changes  in  the  repre- 
sentative system  of  the  country,  in  the  absence  of  proposals 
for  the  redress  of  the  large  inequalities  existing  in  the  distri- 
bution of  electoral  power/1 1  After  three  nights'  debate  the 
second  reading  was  carried  by  the  small  majority  of  14  (292 
against  278).  The  debate  had  made  it  clear  that  the  Bill 
could  not  live  through  the  Committee  stage,  and  it  was  not 
set  down  again  for  discussion. 

A  Local  Veto  Bill  which  was  introduced  by  the  Chan- 
cellor of  the  Exchequer  (Sir  William  Harcourt)  in  April 
1895  had  an  even  shorter  life  and  a  more  inglorious  history. 
Sir  William  made  an  elaborate  speech  in  introducing  it, 
and,  as  in  the  Home  Rule  debate,  I  followed  him  at  once 
and  dealt  at  length  with  the  proposals  he  had  just  explained.8 
In  the  second  sentence  of  my  speech  I  expressed  my  belief 
that  the  Bill  would  never  be  set  down  for  a  second  reading. 
The  forecast  was  correct.  We  did  not  of  course  divide 
against  its  introduction,  and  the  Bill  received  the  honour 
of  being  printed.  That  was  sufficient ;  the  House  of  Com- 
mons never  heard  of  it  again. 

I  do  not  think  Harcourt  was  much  disappointed.  Indeed 
it  always  appeared  to  me  that  after  Lord  Rosebery  became 
Prime  Minister  he  took  but  little  interest  in  the  work  of 
the  House  of  Commons,  with  the  notable  exception  of  the 
Death  Duties  Bill  of  1894.  That  was  a  great  personal 
triumph.  There  have  been  in  my  recollection  three  great 
exhibitions  of  parliamentary  skill.  They  were — the  conduct 
of  the  Reform  Bill,  1867,  by  Mr.  Disraeli,  the  conduct  of 
the  Redistribution  Bill  of  1885  by  Sir  Charles  Dilke,  and 
1  Selected  Speeches,  p.  154.  a  Ibid.,  p.  47. 


1892-5]  DILKE  AND  HARCOURT  313 

the  conduct  of  the  Death  Duties  Bill  of  1894  by  Sir  William 
Harcourt.  Each  was  a  remarkable  achievement.  In  1885 
Sir  Charles  Dilke  showed,  only  a  few  months  before  the 
wreck  of  his  political  career,  qualities  and  capacities  which 
promised  to  make  him  one  of  the  foremost  English  states- 
men of  his  time.  His  extraordinary  industry  ;  the  fullness 
and  exactness  of  his  knowledge ;  his  perfect  tact  and 
temper  in  dealing  with  questions  every  one  of  which  had 
a  special  and  peculiar  importance  to  some  member  or  group 
of  members  in  the  House ;  the  air  of  impartiality  with  which 
he  did  everything  that  was  possible  to  give  an  advantage 
to  his  own  side, — these  deserved  to  be  remembered  with 
gratitude  by  those  who  were  his  colleagues. 

The  achievement  of  Sir  William  Harcourt  was  in  some 
respects  greater.  In  the  case  of  the  Redistribution  Bill  the 
minister  had  not  only  a  substantial  majority  to  support 
him,  but  he  was  carrying  out  a  task  which  had  been  under- 
taken at  the  instance  of  his  opponents,  and  was  therefore 
exempt  from  their  serious  opposition.  But  Sir  William 
had  to  carry  a  novel  and  complicated  proposal  in  a  House 
where  he  had  only  a  majority  of  40,  which  would  be  turned 
into  a  minority  at  any  moment  if  he  offended  the  eighty 
Irishmen  upon  whose  support  the  existence  of  the  Govern- 
ment depended.  Indeed  the  Finance  Bill  only  passed  the 
second  reading  by  a  majority  of  14.  Met  by  a  bitter  and 
pertinacious  opposition,  he  for  thirty  sittings  argued,  and 
explained,  and  persuaded,  with  singularly  little  aid  from 
an  Attorney-General  (Sir  John  Rigby),  who  was  unused  to 
House  of  Commons  debate  and  unfitted  for  it,  or  from  his 
colleagues.  And  on  the  third  reading  the  majority  was 
increased  to  20. 

The  Government  spent  the  spring  of  1895  in  what  Lord 
Rosebery  at  the  time  described  as  "  ploughing  the  sands  "  ; 
by  trying  to  pass  a  Bill  for  the  disestablishment  and  di sen- 
do  wment  of  the  Welsh  Church,  a  project  in  which  they  were 
of  course  supported  by  the  Nationalist  Roman  Catholics. 

The  end  came  suddenly  and  strangely.  The  Home 
Secretary  (Mr.  Asquith)  was  in  charge  of  the  measure,  and 


314         THE  FRONT  OPPOSITION  BENCH     [CHAP,  xxiv 

he  fought  it  with  firmness,  eloquence,  and  courage.  It 
was  almost  through  Committee  when,  on  June  i8th,  Mr. 
Gladstone,  who  was  paired  in  favour  of  the  Government, 
desired  to  be  set  free  from  his  pair,  and  let  it  be  known  that 
he  was  no  longer  a  supporter  of  the  Bill.  On  the  evening 
of  the  20th  Mr.  Asquith  was  absent  from  the  House,  and 
the  majority  in  a  division  in  Committee  fell  to  seven.  The 
next  night  the  House  was  in  Committee  of  Supply.  A 
discussion  unexpectedly  arose  about  the  supply  of  cordite; 
a  reduction  in  the  vote  was  moved,  and  when  the  division 
was  taken  the  Government  was  found  to  have  been  beaten 
by  seven.  I  was  not  in  the  House,  though  I  was,  I  suppose, 
as  usual  paired.  My  friend  Penrose  Fitzgerald  voted  in 
the  division,  did  not  know  that  anything  important  was 
happening,  did  not  wait  to  hear  the  numbers  announced, 
and  learned  from  the  newspapers  the  next  morning  that  the 
Government  had  fallen.  Some  people  were  surprised  that 
a  vote  of  confidence  was  not  proposed,  which  would  have 
wiped  out  the  casual  defeat ;  but  if  the  incident  was  not 
arranged,  which  I  think  it  was,  it  was  found  to  be  a  con- 
venient way  out  of  a  very  unpleasant  situation. 

Sir  William  Harcourt  was  deeply  aggrieved  at  having 
been  set  aside  when  the  leadership  was  vacant  on  the  retire- 
ment of  Mr.  Gladstone.  He  went  on  for  a  year  and  a  half, 
and  showed  himself  an  admirable  leader  of  the  House  of 
Commons,  but  he  was  hardly  on  speaking  terms  with  some 
of  his  colleagues,  and  made  no  secret  of  their  personal  differ- 
ences. There  was  another  and  stronger  reason  for  the 
ministers  being  inclined  to  go  out  on  a  matter  of  small 
importance.  The  defection  of  Mr.  Gladstone  had  sealed 
the  fate  of  the  Welsh  Church  Bill.  It  had  been  many  days 
in  Committee,  and  there  had  been  some  difficulty  in  securing 
even  a  small  majority.  Waver ers  had  been  kept  loyal  by 
being  reminded  that  he,  though  absent,  was  supporting  the 
Bill  by  his  pair.  Now  it  became  very  probable  that,  after 
all  the  time  spent  upon  it,  this  Bill,  like  the  Registration 
Bill,  and  the  Local  Veto  Bill,  and  the  Employers  Liability 
Bill,  would  have  to  be  abandoned. 


1892-5]  A  NEW  MINISTRY  315 

As  in  1885  the  Government  went  out  upon  the  Whisky 
Tax  instead  of  Coercion  in  Ireland,  so  in  1895  they  preferred 
to  go  out  on  Cordite  rather  than  on  Welsh  Church  Dis- 
establishment. Lord  Salisbury  was  recalled  to  office,  and 
Lord  Halsbury  resumed  his  position  as  Lord  Chancellor. 
Webster  and  I  agreed  that  we  would  refuse  to  submit  to 
any  limitation  of  our  private  practice,  and  we  discussed 
the  subject  with  Lord  Halsbury,  who  was  himself  strongly 
in  favour  of  a  reversion  to  the  old  system,  and  at  his  request 
I  prepared  a  short  memorandum  which  he  desired  to  have 
with  him  when  the  matter  was  considered  by  the  Cabinet. 
This  was  on  July  3rd. 

On  the  morning  of  the  8th  I  had  a  letter  from  the  Prime 
Minister  saying  that  the  House  of  Commons  members  of  the 
Cabinet  were  unanimous  in  thinking  that  the  House  of 
Commons  would  not  give  way  upon  the  question  of  the 
retention  of  private  practice.  He  went  on  to  say  : 

I  do  not  know  whether  further  discussion  would  furnish 
any  opening  for  an  agreement  on  this  matter.  Our  own 
parliamentary  and  political  advantages,  the  interests  of  the 
Bar,  as  well  as  our  recollections  of  the  past,  make  us  desire 
very  earnestly  that,  if  we  win  at  the  elections,  you  should 
resume  your  old  position  as  Solicitor-General.  I  have 
thought  that  under  the  circumstances  the  best  course  will 
be  not  to  make  any  submission  as  to  the  office  of  Solicitor- 
General  until  later  on.  Then,  if  we  win  the  elections,  a 
further  effort  must  be  made  to  discover  whether  there  is 
any  middle  term  between  your  views  and  those  to  which 
the  House  of  Commons  seems  to  cling. 

I  of  course  gratefully  accepted  this  suggestion,  and  went 
down  to  the  contest  at  Plymouth.  I  felt  quite  confident 
that  I  should  be  returned ;  but  an  unfortunate  incident  had 
made  it  necessary  to  find  a  new  candidate  for  the  second 
seat.  Sir  Edward  Bates  had  retired  three  years  before; 
and  my  colleague  in  this  Parliament  had  been  a  young 
baronet,  the  son  of  a  notable  shipowner  and  engineer  who 
had  founded  the  great  Fairfield  Works.  The  son  was  a 


3i6         THE  FRONT  OPPOSITION  BENCH     [CHAP,  xxiv 

young  man  of  much  ability  and  charming  manners,  an 
excellent  candidate  and  a  very  pleasant  colleague,  and  his 
personal  qualities  and  his  generous  wealth  seemed  to  secure 
a  prolonged  membership  for  Plymouth.  Unhappily  a  year 
after  his  election  he  was  the  co-respondent  in  an  undefended 
suit  in  the  Divorce  Court.  There  was  as  little  moral  guilt 
in  his  case  as  there  could  possibly  be.  The  immoral  con- 
nection began  at  Oxford  when  he  was  an  undergraduate, 
and  he  had  no  reason  to  suppose  that  the  woman  who  was 
living  a  life  of  professional  sin  was  a  married  woman.  But 
a  strong  section  of  the  Unionists  refused  to  support  him  at 
another  election,  and  we  were  forced  to  seek  another  candi- 
date. 

We  found  a  very  good  one  in  the  Hon.  Evelyn  Hubbard, 
the  younger  son  of  the  first  Lord  Addington.  I  could  not 
have  wished  for  a  better  fellow- worker  in  public  life.  A 
man  of  high  character  and  education  and  great  business 
experience,  sound  in  judgement,  weighty  in  speech,  dignified 
and  courteous  in  manner,  I  looked  forward  with  the  greatest 
interest  and  pleasure  to  our  association  in  political  affairs. 
All  seemed  to  go  well,  and  on  the  day  of  election  we  felt 
sure  that  we  should  both  be  elected.  We  did  not  go  to  the 
counting  of  the  votes,  but  waited  with  many  friends  at  the 
Globe  Hotel  to  hear  the  result.  When  the  figures  came  they 
were:  Clarke,  5,575;  Harrison,  5,482;  Hubbard,  5,466; 
Mendl,  5,298. 

It  was  a  great  disappointment,  and  when  it  was  presently 
explained  I  was  still  more  mortified.  I  had  almost  wearied 
the  electors  with  my  exhortations  to  vote  for  both  -of  us, 
and  Hubbard  had  also.  At  the  election  in  1892  these 
exhortations  had  been  so  successful  that  exactly  the  same 
number  of  votes  (5,081)  were  polled  for  my  colleague  and 
for  myself.  But  this  time  46  had  plumped  for  me ;  and  it 
turned  out  that  a  number  of  my  oldest  and  foremost  friends 
who  did  not  vote  until  the  afternoon,  feeling  quite  certain 
that  we  were  both  winning,  voted  for  me  only  in  order  to 
make  sure  that  I  should  still  be  the  senior  member.  The 
contest  had  indeed  been  much  closer  than  I  had  expected. 


1892-5]  I  REFUSE  OFFICE  3*7 

Many  of  the  poorer  voters  thought  that  my  former  colleague 
had  been  ill-treated;  the  aggrieved  shipwrights  had  not 
quite  got  over  their  resentment ;  and  some  of  the  Liberal 
Unionists  slipped  back  to  their  old  allegiance,  now  that 
Home  Rule  appeared  to  have  been  finally  defeated  and  was 
not  mentioned  in  the  addresses  of  the  Liberal  candidates. 

Directly  I  got  back  to  London  discussion  began  again 
about  the  Solicitor-Generalship,  and  eventually  Lord 
Salisbury  sent  to  ask  me  to  see  him  at  the  House  of  Lords. 
Webster  had  given  in,  and  was  appointed  Attorney  before 
his  re-election  in  the  Isle  of , Wight,  so  of  course  there  could 
no  longer  be  any  question  of  a  reversion  to  the  former 
practice.  The  Prime  Minister  was  kind  and  persuasive,  but 
I  was  firm,  and  eventually  my  decision  was  accepted. 

We  shook  hands,  and  I  was  leaving  the  room  when  Lord 
Salisbury  said,  "  By  the  by,  I  should  like  to  tell  you  that 
if  at  any  time  within  the  next  two  years  Sir  Richard  Webster 
vacates  the  Attorney-Generalship  I  shall  ask  you  to  fill  his 
place."  I  thanked  him  again  for  his  great  kindness,  and  he 
said,  "  You  may  like  to  have  that  promise  in  writing  ;  I 
will  send  it  to-morrow." 

The  next  day  he  wrote  me  the  following  letter  : 

Confidential 

HATFIELD  HOUSE,  HATFIELD,  HERTS, 

August  i6th,  1895. 

DEAR  SIR  EDWARD, 

In  pursuance  of  our  conversation  of  last  night,  I 
write  a  line  to  say  in  the  first  place  how  much  I  regret  that 
you  will  not  resume  your  office  as  Solicitor-General,  and  in 
the  second  to  say  that  in  offering  it  to  anybody  else  I  shall 
reserve  to  myself  the  right  to  offer  you  the  office  of  Attorney- 
General  in  case  it  should  fall  vacant  within  the  next 
eighteen  months.  If  I  can  fill  up  the  office  of  Solicitor- 
General  on  these  terms  (which  I  do  not  doubt),  you  may 
count  on  my  offering  you  the  post  of  Attorney-General  if 
it  should  fall  vacant  within  the  time  I  have  named. 

Yours  very  truly, 

SALISBURY. 


318         THE  FRONT  OPPOSITION  BENCH     [CHAP,  xxiv 

A  few  days  later  my  wife  and  I  (with  her  old  friend  who 
had  served  as  her  only  bridesmaid  thirteen  years  before) 
went  off  to  Italy.  We  had  spent  a  month  there  in  the 
previous  year,  travelling  by  way  of  Paris  and  Zurich  to 
Locarno,  and  then  visiting  Lugano,  Menaggio,  Milan,  Venice, 
Florence,  Genoa,  and  Turin. 

This  time  we  made  the  first  of  our  sea  trips,  and  went 
to  Brindisi  by  the  P.  &  O.  boat  Coromandel.  We  called  at 
Gibraltar  ;  and  there  I  heard  to  my  great  joy  that  my  friend 
Robert  Finlay  had  been  appointed  Solicitor-General.  The 
country  lost  nothing  by  my  refusal  of  the  office.  It  gained 
the  service  of  one  of  the  ablest  men  I  have  ever  known,  a 
sound  lawyer,  shrewd  in  judgement  and  clear  in  argument, 
of  instinctive  honesty  in  purpose  and  in  word,  who  during 
the  eleven  years  of  legal  office  which  began  in  1895  estab- 
lished for  himself  a  reputation  and  position  which,  though 
strangely  disregarded  in  the  clumsy  political  transactions 
of  1915,  brought  him  soon  afterwards  to  his  rightful  place 
upon  the  Woolsack. 

Landing  at  Brindisi,  we  went  to  spend  a  week  at  Naples, 
and  then  travelled  by  night  to  Bologna,  just  breaking  the 
journey  for  a  couple  of  hours  to  have  a  moonlight  drive  in 
Rome,  thence  for  a  stay  of  a  few  days  at  Venice,  and  then 
loitering  homewards  by  way  of  Verona,  Milan,  Bellagio,  and 
Lugano. 


CHAPTER    XXV 

VENEZUELA   AND    THE    JAMESON   RAID  I     1895-1896 

BEFORE  the  end  of  the  year  the  peaceful  prospects  of  the 
Ministry  were  suddenly  and  heavily  overclouded  by  the 
opening  of  a  very  serious  controversy  with  the  Government 
of  the  United  States.  My  conduct  at  this  time  was  mis- 
understood by  many  of  my  friends,  and  was  wilfully  mis- 
represented by  others.  And  in  later  years  it  was  made  a 
subject  of  reproach.  So  in  this  book,  which  will  probably 
be  the  only  record  of  my  public  and  private  life,  I  think 
that  in  justice  to  myself  I  ought  to  make  the  matter  clear. 

For  more  than  fifty  years  there  had  been  disagreement 
and  occasional  dispute  between  Great  Britain  and  Venezuela 
about  the  boundaries  of  British  Guiana.  Nothing  of 
serious  importance  had  occurred  recently  to  aggravate  the 
differences  between  the  two  countries,  or  to  convince  our 
leisurely  diplomacy  that  they  urgently  needed  adjustment. 

But  in  the  United  States  a  presidential  election  was 
approaching,  and  a  bid  was  made  for  the  Irish  vote.  Dis- 
patches were  written  by  Mr.  Olney,  the  American  Secre- 
tary for  Foreign  Affairs,  of  an  unusual  and  somewhat  menac- 
ing character ;  and  on  December  i7th  a  message  was 
received  by  Congress  from  President  Cleveland  in  which 
he  asked  that  provision  should  be  made  for  the  expenses 
of  a  commission  to  be  appointed  by  the  Executive  which 
should  investigate  the  boundary  question  and  report  without 
delay.  And  the  message  went  on  to  declare  it  to  be 

the  duty  of  the  United  States  to  resist  by  every  means  in 
its  power,  as  a  wilful  aggression  upon  its  rights  and  interests, 
the  appropriation  by  Great  Britain  of  any  land  which  after 

319 


320    VENEZUELA  AND  THE  JAMESON  RAID  [CHAP,  xxv 

investigation  may  be  determined  of  right   to   belong  to 
Venezuela. 

These  words  were  received  with  tumultuous  applause. 

The  danger  of  the  situation  was  at  once  appreciated  by 
this  country.  The  Times  on  the  same  day  on  which  it  pub- 
lished the  message  said  : 

It  is  impossible  to  disguise  the  gravity  of  the  difficulties 
which  have  arisen  between  this  country  and  the  United 
States. 

But  it  went  on  to  add : 

The  main  point  at  issue  is  not  whether  a  case  can  be 
made  out  for  submitting  the  entire  Venezuelan  boundary 
to  arbitration.  There  are  cogent  reasons,  some  of  which 
are  set  forth  in  Lord  Salisbury's  first  dispatch,  against  that 
course ;  but  if  it  had  been  open  to  consideration  Mr.  Olney's 
arguments  and  Mr.  Cleveland's  proposals  would  have  made 
the  adoption  of  it  impossible. 

We  must  stand  firmly  and  calmly  upon  our  rights  as  an 
independent  state,  and  if  necessary  take  practical  measures 
to  assert  them.  It  may  even  be  expedient  to  settle  the 
frontier  question  by  drawing  a  line  of  our  own  ;  of  course 
there  can  be  no  thought  of  anything  less  than  the  Schom- 
burgk  line,  and  leaving  the  United  States  and  Venezuela 
to  deal  with  the  matters  as  they  may. 

This  was  the  line  generally  taken  in  England,  and  the 
situation  became  daily  more  threatening.  On  the  day  that 
article  appeared  the  House  of  Representatives  unanimously 
passed  a  Bill  providing  a  hundred  thousand  dollars  for  the 
expenses  of  the  commission,  and  a  Bill  was  introduced  into 
the  Senate  for  strengthening  the  military  forces  at  a  cost  of 
one  hundred  million  dollars. 

There  was  a  heavy  fall  on  the  Stock  Exchanges.  And 
when  The  New  York  World  sent  an  appeal  to  prominent 
politicians  in  England  to  speak  a  word  of  peace  Mr.  Glad- 
stone's answer  was  singularly  brief  and  cautious,  and  Mr. 
John  Redmond,  the  leader  of  the  Irish  Nationalist  party 
in  the  House  of  Commons,  replied,  "  If  war  results  from  the 


1895-6]  PEACE  OR  WAR?  321 

reassertion  of  the  Monroe  doctrine  Irish  national  sentiment 
will  be  solid  on  the  side  of  America.  With  Home  Rule 
rejected  Ireland  can  have  no  feeling  of  friendliness  for  Great 
Britain." 

On  January  2nd  President  Cleveland  appointed  his 
commission,  and  arrangements  were  made  for  prompt 
procedure  with  its  work.  Had  our  Government  persisted 
in  its  claim  that  the  Schomburgk  line  must  be  considered 
as  the  fixed  and  irreducible  limit  of  the  territory  of  British 
Guiana,  and  that  no  discussion  or  arbitration  could  be 
accepted  as  to  anything  within  that  line,  we  should  in  a 
few  weeks  have  drifted  into  war,  and  a  war  in  which  we 
should  have  been  in  the  wrong.  I  felt  it  my  duty  to  say 
this ;  and  said  it  as  strongly  as  I  could  at  meetings  at  York 
and  at  Accrington. 

On  January  7th,  1896,  the  annual  meeting  of  my  con- 
stituents was  held  at  the  Plymouth  Guildhall ;  and  there  I 
gave  a  full  account  of  the  Schomburgk  line,  and  of  the 
attempts  which  had  from  time  to  time  been  made  to  settle 
the  disputed  boundary.  A  resolution  was  unanimously 
passed  in  a  crowded  hall  that  "  this  meeting  while  regretting 
the  recent  action  of  the  President  of  the  United  States  trusts 
that  Her  Majesty's  Government  will  use  every  means  to 
procure  a  peaceful  and  honourable  solution  of  the  long- 
standing controversy  with  Venezuela  as  to  the  boundaries 
of  British  Guiana." 

I  quote  a  few  sentences  from  my  speech  : 

With  these  facts  before  us  it  cannot  be  too  late  for  a 
peaceful  settlement  of  a  question  such  as  this.  Each  side 
must  to  some  extent  give  way.  We  cannot  under  any 
circumstances  admit  the  authority  of  the  commission  which 
has  been  appointed  in  the  United  States.  We  cannot  under 
any  circumstances  recognise  it,  or  take  any  notice  of  it  or 
its  decisions,  or  submit  to  any  orders  which  may  be  given 
to  us  by  the  Government  of  the  United  States  in  fulfilment 
of  that  ill-advised  message  of  President  Cleveland.  But 
on  the  other  hand  it  is  not  reasonable  for  us  to  say  that 
the  line  which  we  in  1840  laid  down  and  communicated  to 


322    VENEZUELA  AND  THE  JAMESON  RAID  [CHAP.  XXV 

other  Powers,  and  communicated  to  Parliament  as  being 
the  limit  of  our  claims  to  territory,  is  now  to  be  considered 
a  fixed  and  unalterable  line,  and  to  say  that  we  will  only 
arbitrate  in  respect  to  areas  which  are  outside.  That 
would  be  to  take  as  unreasonable  an  attitude  as  the  United 
States  has  taken  in  the  message  which  President  Cleveland 
has  given.  I  hope  that  without  taking  any  notice  of  the 
United  States  Commission,  our  Government  will  be  able 
to  resume  the  work  of  negotiation  with  Venezuela  direct 
upon  this  matter.  I  trust  that  some  mediator  will  be 
found,  not  to  say  between  the  two  lines  whether  this  line 
or  that  shall  be  accepted,  still  less  to  say  that  a  particular 
place  in  dispute  is  to  be  divided  as  nearly  as  possible 
between  the  two,  but  some  mediator  who,  looking  on  the 
whole  history  of  the  case,  at  the  present  condition  of  the 
Settlements  in  that  country,  at  the  natural  delimitations 
which  are  to  be  found  there  and  are  indicated  upon  the 
map,  will  say,  as  between  England  and  Venezuela,  where 
the  line  should  be  drawn.  I  think  that  such  a  mediator 
may  be  found,  and  that  his  judgement  may  with  honour 
be  accepted  by  this  country  as  well  as  by  Venezuela.  No 
doubt  if  that  course  is  taken  we  shall  have  something  to 
bear.  We  shall  have  to  bear  taunts  and  jibes  from  political 
opponents  here,  possibly  from  those  who  are  not  fond 
of  England  on  the  other  side  of  the  Atlantic.  It  will  not 
be  pleasant  to  be.  told  that  we  have  given  way.  It  will 
not  be  pleasant  to  be  told  that,  after  such  a  message  sent 
to  Congress,  Great  Britain  has  consented  to  arbitrate  upon 
matters  upon  which  she  had  before  refused.  It  will  not 
be  pleasant.  But  what  of  that  ?  I  do  not  believe  in  that 
false  and  bastard  honour  which  is  afraid  to  do  justice  because 
justice  has  been  demanded  with  an  insult  or  a  menace.  It 
is  our  business,  especially  in  face  of  the  fearful  calamity 
that  would  be  involved  in  an  armed  contest  between  this 
country  and  the  United  States,  to  make  up  our  mind  what 
is  right  in  this  matter.  And  when  we  have  made  up  our 
mind  what  it  is  right  to  do,  let  us  do  it  quietly,  calmly,  not 
caring  what  may  be  said  of  us,  or  what  taunts  may  be 
uttered,  but  content  that  we  shall  have  helped  to  preserve 
the  peace  of  the  world  by  that  conduct  which  alone  is  worthy 
of  a  great  nation,  and  shown  our  capacity  to  do  right 
whatever  the  consequences  or  the  provocation  may  be.1 
1  Public  Speeches,  1890-1900,  p.  80. 


1895-6]  PEACE 

At  the  time  I  spoke  at  Plymouth,  though  I  was  not  then 
aware  of  it,  an  agreement  was  being  made  by  which  the 
British  Government  withdrew  the  condition  against  which 
I  had  protested,  and  agreed  to  a  free  arbitration.  By  the 
award  of  the  Arbitrators  in  1899  Great  Britain  obtained  no 
territory  outside  the  Schomburgk  line;  while  Venezuela 
obtained  two  portions  of  territory  within  that  line,  one 
unimportant,  the  other  an  important  area  at  the  mouth 
of  the  Orinoco  upon  which  she  had  always  insisted.  My 
contentions  were  thus  entirely  justified  ;  and  although  my 
speeches  may  not  have  influenced  Lord  Salisbury  in  taking 
the  wise  and  statesmanlike  course  which  removed  all 
danger  of  war,  I  think  they  were  of  use  in  justifying  that 
course  to  some  of  his  followers  as  well  as  to  his  opponents. 

This  threatening  cloud  passed  harmlessly  away,  and  the 
severe  but  momentary  strain  in  the  relations  between  the 
two  great  countries  left  no  evil  effects. 

But  an  incident  which  occurred  at  the  very  time  when 
this  strain  was  most  acute,  and  then  seemed  of  much  less 
importance,  was  destined  to  have  grave  and  far-reaching 
results.  This  was  the  Jameson  raid  into  the  Transvaal. 

That  enterprise  failed.  Dr.  Jameson  and  his  officers  and 
men  were  made  prisoners  and  sent  to  England,  and  while 
the  troopers  were  allowed  to  return  to  their  homes,  the 
leader  and  a  number  of  his  followers  were  at  once  prose- 
cuted for  a  breach  of  the  Foreign  Enlistment  Act. 

It  was  yet  early  in  1896  when  Mr.  Bourchier  Hawkesley 
came  to  instruct  me  to  appear  for  their  defence.  It  was  a 
case  of  great  interest.  I  did  not  foresee  that  in  its  later 
consequences  it  would  change  the  course  of  my  public  life 
and  defeat  all  my  hopes  of  political  eminence. 

The  story  had  begun  in  the  middle  of  the  year  1894. 
Lord  Loch  went  to  Pretoria  for  the  opening  of  the  Delagoa 
Bay  Railway,  and  the  old  President  Kruger  found  himself 
sitting  with  the  British  High  Commissioner  in  an  open 
carriage  over  which  the  Union  Jack  was  hoisted.  Kruger 
knew  what  it  meant.  He  knew  that  already  in  Johannes- 
burg the  Outlanders — English  and  German — were  forming 


324    VENEZUELA  AND  THE  JAMESON  'RAID  k  [CHAP,  xxv 

schemes  for  overthrowing  the  Boer  Government,  and  he 
saw  that  he  had  now  to  deal  with  an  attack  which  would 
be  prepared  and  engineered  with  the  encouragement,  and 
he  believed  the  co-operation,  of  the  English  Government. 

He  immediately  began  to  prepare  for  the  conflict.  In 
August  of  that  year  negotiations  were  carried  on  with 
various  European  firms  for  the  supply  of  arms  and  ammuni- 
tion, forts  were  built,  and  the  bonds  of  discipline  were 
drawn  closer  in  the  very  ill-organised  forces  of  the  Republic. 
The  Transvaal  expenditure  on  services  which  included  war 
expenditure  was  in  1894  £528,526  ;  in  1895  it  rose  to 
£1,485,244. 

Meanwhile  the  Outlanders'  plans  were  steadily  pushed 
forward ;  and  in  the  latter  part  of  1895  they  had  the  active 
help  of  the  British  Government.  Bechuanaland  was  a 
British  Protectorate,  and  there  had  been  many  disputes 
between  the  native  chiefs  and  the  Chartered  Company  as 
to  territorial  rights.  A  mission  of  the  native  chiefs  came 
to  England;  and  after  many  discussions  at  the  Colonial 
Office,  where  Mr.  Chamberlain  was  now  in  control,  a  settle- 
ment was  effected.  It  was  arranged  that  Montisoia  should 
transfer  to  the  Chartered  Company  a  strip  of  land  along 
the  frontier  of  the  Transvaal,  and  that  possession  of  this 
strip,  which  included  Pitsani  Potlugo,  should  be  given  to  the 
Company  by  November  7th.  It  had  also  been  arranged 
that  the  British  Bechuanaland  Border  Police,  a  military 
force  which  many  young  officers  had  joined,  being  seconded 
from  their  regiments  for  that  purpose,  should  be  disbanded. 
At  Pitsani  Potlugo  they  were  enrolled  in  the  forces  of  the 
Chartered  Company,  and  Dr.  Jameson  was  put  in  command. 
These  arrangements,  even  if  they  were  not  made  with  a  view 
to  an  attack  on  the  Transvaal,  clearly  afforded  the  oppor- 
tunity for  such  an  attack  being  made. 

The  conspirators  at  Johannesburg  were  preparing  for  a 
rising  in  that  town.  They  had  plenty  of  money ;  and  during 
that  autumn  large  supplies  of  arms  and  ammunition  had 
been  smuggled  into  the  district  as  machinery  for  the  mines, 
and  were  safely  stored  there.  But  an  actual  rising  at 


1895-6]  THE  CONSPIRATORS  325 

Johannesburg  without  help  from  outside  would  have  been 
too  risky ;  and  the  nearest  point  where  a  supporting  force 
could  .be  gathered  was  this  very  spot  of  Pitsani  Potlugo, 
which  was  only  170  miles  from  Johannesburg,  with  no 
important  town  to  be  passed  on  the  road. 

Cecil  Rhodes,  the  Prime  Minister  of  Cape  Colony,  was  the 
real  mover  in  the  matter ;  and  the  preparations  for  aft  in- 
surrection at  Johannesburg,  and  the  assembly  at  Pitsani 
Potlugo  of  a  force  which  should  support  the  insurrection  and 
suffice  to  ensure  its  success,  were  made  with  the  full  know- 
ledge of  the  English  Colonial  Office.  In  the  middle  of 
December  these  preparations  were  practically  complete. 
Rhodes  went  to  Cape  Town,  where  Beit  and  Leonard  were 
to  await^  results.  Sir  Hercules  Robinson  was  told  that  he 
must  be  within  reach  if  the  enterprise  should  fail,  and  his 
intervention  should  be  necessary  to  prevent  serious  conse- 
quences to  the  conspirators ;  and  two  regiments  of  cavalry 
were  detained  at  Cape  Town  and  Durban  on  their  way 
between  England  and  India  in  case  they  might  be  found 
useful.  The  English  forces  in  South  Africa  had  been 
strengthened. 

Miss  Flora  Shaw  (afterwards  Lady  Lugard)  was  the 
confidential  agent  of  Mr.  Rhodes  in  London,  and  had  his 
cypher.  She  called  frequently  at  the  Colonial  Office,  and 
kept  Mr.  Rhodes  informed  of  the  opinions  and  wishes  there 
expressed. 

At  Pitsani  Potlugo  Dr.  Jameson  quite  honestly  and 
truthfully  told  his  officers  and  troopers  that  the  advance 
they  were  making  was  in  the  service  of  the  Queen ;  and  on 
December  2Qth  about  600  men  rode  out  from  the  border 
territory  on  the  way  to  Johannesburg. 

An  attempt  was  made  to  stop  them.  A  difference  had 
arisen  between  Cecil  Rhodes,  who  had  agreed  that  the 
insurrectionary  movement  should  be  under  the  British 
flag,  and  some  of  the  Outlanders,  who  wished  to  retain  the 
flag  of  the  Transvaal  Republic. 

On  December  28th  a  telegram  was  sent  from  Cape  Town 
to  Dr.  Jameson — "  It  is  absolutely  necessary  to  delay  flota- 
22 


326    VENEZUELA  AND  THE  JAMESON  RAID  [CHAP,  xxv 

tion.  If  foreign  subscribers  insist  on  floating  without  delay 
anticipate  complete  failure" — and  the  leaders  at  Johannes- 
burg assumed  that  it  would  be  acted  on.  But  news  had 
come  to  Dr.  Jameson  that  small  parties  of  armed  burghers 
had  been  observed  on  roads  near  which  his  route  lay.  He 
believed  that  his  reserve  of  horses  and  stores  at  Malmani 
and  Doornport  had  been  discovered,  and  that  if  he  did  not 
start  then  the  whole  project  must  be  abandoned;  so  he 
rode  forward. 

An  accident,  or  the  blunder  of  a  drunken  trooper,  which 
proved  very  fortunate  for  Mr.  Chamberlain,  prevented  the 
cutting  of  the  wires  at  Pitsani  Potlugo,  and  a  telegram  which 
was  not  expected  to  be  delivered  was  sent  ordering  Jame- 
son to  return.  It  was  delivered  but  not  obeyed ;  and  Dr. 
Jameson  and  his  men,  having  changed  horses  on  the  way, 
arrived  at  Krugersdorp  on  January  2nd.  Here  a  slight 
engagement  was  fought;  but  the  expedition  got  past  the 
hills  where  the  Boers  were  posted,  and,  being  within  seven- 
teen miles  of  Johannesburg,  could  have  reached  that  city 
without  difficulty,  but  that  they  heard  firing  to  the  north  of 
the  hills  where  the  fight  had  taken  place.  The  leaders 
thought  it  possible  that  their  friends  at  Johannesburg  had 
come  out  expecting  to  meet  them  on  the  northern  road, 
and  they  waited  for  four  hours  to  ascertain  what  the  firing 
meant. 

That  delay  was  fatal.  When  they  tried  to  move  forward 
they  found  themselves  surrounded  by  a  force  which  made 
surrender  imperative.  They  surrendered  on  a  promise 
that  their  lives  should  be  spared ;  and  the  Jameson  raid  was 
over.  Its  chief  immediate  result  was  that  it  provoked 
from  the  German  Emperor,  who  knew  or  guessed  the  real 
facts,  a  telegram  to  President  Kruger  which  treated  the 
Transvaal  as  an  independent  State.  There  was  a  growl 
of  indignation  in  England.  With  admirable  promptitude 
a  strong  flying  squadron  was  dispatched  to  the  Southern 
Seas.  And  a  great  increase  in  our  naval  expenditure  re- 
minded the  Kaiser  that  in  the  then  condition  of  his  fleet 
Germany  could  only  play  a  subordinate  part  in  the  politics 


1895-6]  DR.  JAMESON  327 

of  the  world.     From  his  resentful  consciousness  of  this 
fact  many  momentous  results  have  flowed. 

When  the  prisoners  arrived  in  London  I  had  the  pleasure 
of  making  the  acquaintance  of  Dr.  Jameson,  an  acquaint- 
ance renewed  and  strengthened  ten  years  later  when  he, 
who  in  the  circling  wheel  of  political  change  had  become 
Prime  Minister  of  Cape  Colony,  received  me  as  his  guest  at 
Groot  Schoor. 

I  never  met  a  man  whose  noble  nature  shone  so  strongly 
through  all  the  sayings  and  doings  of  a  simple  and  un- 
affected life,  and  compelled  the  respect  and  affection  of  all 
who  came  in  contact  with  him.  He  was  "  as  the  greatest 
always  are,  in  his  simplicity  sublime." 

He  talked  quite  frankly  about  the  happenings  in  the 
Transvaal.  About  the  consequences  to  himself  he  seemed 
absolutely  indifferent ;  all  his  concern  was  for  the  men 
who  had  followed  him,  and  so  been  led  into  the  adventure 
for  which  they  were  now  to  be  tried. 

He  was  very  much  relieved  when  it  was  announced  that 
only  five  of  his  officers  would  actually  be  included  with  him 
in  the  prosecution.  The  proceedings  at  the  Bow  Street 
Police  Court  were  almost  formal. 

I  was  of  course  shown  all  the  messages  and  letters  which 
had  passed  between  London  and  South  Africa,  and  between 
Johannesburg  and  Cape  Town  and  Pitsani. 

But  I  received  definite  instructions  that  no  question  was 
to  be  asked,  or  any  fact  elicited,  that  might  suggest  that 
any  department  or  official  of  the  British  Government  knew 
of  the  preparations  for  the  enterprise,  or  was  directly  or 
indirectly  responsible  for  it. 

The  trial  at  the  Royal  Courts  came  on  in  the  last  week 
of  July  and  lasted  for  five  days.  It  was  a  trial  at  Bar 
before  three  judges,  Lord  Russell,  the  Lord  Chief  Justice, 
presiding,  and  being  supported  by  Baron  Pollock  and  Mr. 
Justice  Hawkins.  Sir  Richard  Webster,  as  Attorney- 
General,  prosecuted,  with  Sir  Robert  Finlay,  the  Solicitor- 
General,  and  Henry  Sutton,  C.  W.  (now  Sir  Charles)  Mathews, 
Horace  (now  Mr.  Justice)  Avory,  and  Rawlinson  as  his 


328    VENEZUELA  AND  THE  JAMESON  RAID  [CHAP,  xxv 

juniors.  I  defended  Dr.  Jameson,  Carson  (now  Sir  Edward), 
C.  F.  Gill,  and  Alfred  Lyttelton  being  briefed  with  me  ; 
and  Sir  Frank  Lockwood  and  Wallis  'and  Roskill  defended 
the  other  prisoners. 

The  trial  was  conducted  with  great  dignity  by  the  Lord 
Chief  Justice.  At  the  Bar  Charles  Russell  had  been  one 
of  the  most  powerful  advocates  of  his  time.  His  industry 
and  energy  and  shrewd  and  rapid  judgement  made  him 
always  a  very  formidable  opponent.  And  they  were  greatly 
helped  by  his  personal  advantages.  A  commanding 
presence,  a  full  clear  resonant  voice,  a  flashing  eye  and 
imperious  gesture,  often  bore  down  opposition,  and  unnerved 
the  witness  he  was  cross-examining,  or  a  young  counsel 
who  was  appearing  against  him,  and  sometimes  even  the 
judge-.  When  he  had  a  very  strong  case  and  felt  certain 
of  winning  he  was  superb.  But  if  difficulties  unexpectedly 
arose  he  became  impatient  and  irritable,  and  would  often 
compel  a  reluctant  client  to  an  unsatisfactory  compromise. 

•When  he  became  a  judge  the  faults  of  manner  and  temper 
which  had  prevented  his  being  very  popular  at  the  Bar 
gradually  disappeared.  His  death  at  the  age  of  sixty-eight 
was  a  national  calamity;  for  he  was  then  a  judge  of  the 
highest  class,  just,  painstaking,  and  courteous,  sound  in 
learning,  and  resolute  that  right  should  be  done.  I  have 
no  doubt  that  if  he  had  been  spared  for  ten  years  longer 
he  would  have  ranked  among  the  greatest  of  English 
judges. 

The  Jameson  trial  was  not  very  interesting.  There  was 
no  dispute  about  the  facts ;  and  as  my  instructions  precluded 
me  from  taking  the  line  of  defence  which  would  certainly 
have  been  successful,  my  chief  concern  was  with  certain 
important  questions  of  law  upon  which  I  felt  sure  that  the 
ruling  of  the  judges  would  be  against  me,  although  I  was 
confident  of  success  when  they  should  be  argued  before  a 
higher  court. 

Dr.  Jameson  did  not  expect  to  be  acquitted,  and  I  think 
he  did  not  desire  it.  He  was  quite  willing  to  bear  any 
penalty,  and  was  hopeful  that  his  condemnation  and  punish- 


1895-6]  AN  EVIL  PRECEDENT  329 

ment  might  avert  serious  mischief  in  South  Africa,  and 
possibly  in  England. 

The  summing  up  was  careful,  dignified,  and  quite  fair ; 
but  at  its  close  the  Lord  Chief  Justice  made  a  strange 
departure  from  the  proper  and  well-established  practice  of 
our  courts.  Instead  of  contenting  himself  with  recapitu- 
lating the  evidence  and  directing  the  jury  as  to  the  law, 
and  then  leaving  to  them  the  responsibility  of  the  verdict, 
he  asked  them  to  answer  certain  questions  of  fact,  and  then 
upon  their  answers  directed  them  to  find  a  verdict  of  guilty. 
I  protested,  but  the  Chief  would  not  suffer  any  interference. 
Sir  Richard  Webster,  who  felt  as  strongly  as  I  did  the 
impropriety  of  the  judge's  action,  has  since  (in  his  volume 
of  recollections)  said  that  I  missed  a  great  opportunity,  and 
expressed  his  surprise  that  I  did  not  more  firmly  insist  on 
my  protest  being  listened  to.  It  may  be  that  the  criticism 
is  just ;  but  I  do  not  now  see  what  good  purpose  would  have 
been  served  by  a  violent  scene  in  court,  or  by  my  calling 
on  my  colleagues  to  retire  with  me  from  the  court.  The 
protest,  however,  was  not  wholly  ineffective.  I  am  not 
aware  that  the  evil  precedent  then  set  has  ever  been  fol- 
lowed, either  by  Lord  Russell  himself  or  by  any  other 
English  judge. 

The  verdict  of  "  Guilty  "  was  with  some  little  difficulty 
obtained  ;  and  then  the  question  arose  of  arranging  for 
the  argument  of  the  questions  of  law.  This,  however,  Dr. 
Jameson  absolutely  refused  to  permit.  He  told  me  that 
he  had  made  all  arrangements  for  going  off  to  prison  ;  his 
portmanteau  was  packed,  and  he  did  not  wish  any  more 
discussion  about  it. 

Five  years  later  there  was  a  curious  echo  of  the  Jameson 
case.  Speaking  in  the  House  of  Commons  on  March  gth, 
1901,  Mr.  (afterwards  Sir)  Arthur  Markham  made  a  violent 
attack  on  Messrs.  Wernher,  Beit  &  Co.  He  was  challenged 
by  Mr.  (afterwards  Sir)  George  Lewis,  writing  as  their 
solicitor,  to  repeat  his  accusations  where  they  would  not 
be  sheltered  by  parliamentary  privilege,  and  he  promptly 
did  so. 


330    VENEZUELA  AND  THE  JAMESON  RAID  [CHAP,  xxv 

Speaking  at  the  Victoria  Hall,  Mansfield,  on  May  7th, 
he  said,  "  I  charge  Mr.  Arthur  Beit  and  Messrs.  Eckstein 
with  being  thieves  and  swindlers  in  connection  with  the 
part  they  have  played  in  financial  operations  in  South 
Africa."  An  action  for  slander  was  brought  at  once;  and 
in  due  course  the  defendant  pleaded  that  his  statements 
were  true,  and  gave  particulars  of  justification. 

These  particulars  contained  no  allegation  of  any  dis- 
honest action  of  the  plaintiffs  in  their  financial  transactions ; 
but  dealt  in  vague  terms  with  the  political  affairs  of  South 
Africa,  and  the  part  Messrs.  Beit  had  taken  in  financing 
the  Chartered  Company. 

The  fifth  paragraph  of  the  particulars  was  the  most 
important.  It  stated  that  towards  the  end  of  1895  the 
plaintiffs  became  "  prime-movers  in  and  instigators  of  acts 
of  armed  hostility  against  the  South  African  Republic." 
It  was  a  serious  position  for  others  besides  the  defendants. 
Mr.  Beit  came  to  my  chambers  with  Mr.  Hawkesley  for 
consultation.  They  told  me  that  if  the  particulars  stood 
it  would  take  a  staff  of  clerks  six  months  to  arrange  the 
documents  in  their  possession  which  would  have  to  be 
disclosed  in  their  affidavit  of  documents.  But  much  more 
important  was  the  fact  that  they  had,  and  would  be  obliged 
to  disclose,  the  originals  or  copies  of  the  telegrams  which 
had  passed  between  London  and  South  Africa  or  be- 
tween Cape  Town  and  Johannesburg  at  the  time  of  the 
Jameson  raid;  the  telegrams  the  production  of  which 
before  the  House  of  Commons  Committee  had  somehow 
been  avoided. 

I  advised  an  application  to  strike  out  these  paragraphs 
of  the  particulars  as  irrelevant  and  embarrassing.  Master 
Archibald  refused  to  strike  them  out.  Mr.  Justice  Jelf 
affirmed  his  decision. 

Then  we  went  to  the  Court  of  Appeal,  and  had  a  stiff 
fight  before  Lord  Esher  and  Lord  Justice  Stirling. 
Roskill  was  with  me  for  the  plaintiffs,  Rufus  Isaacs  and 
Norman  Craig  on  the  other  side.  Judgment  was  given  in 
our  favour,  Lord  Esher  said  "  Paragraph  5  amounted, 


1895-6]  A   GRACEFUL  COMPLIMENT  33* 

shortly  stated,  to  an  allegation  that  the  plaintiffs  made 
political  agitation  subservient  to  their  personal  interests. 

"  That  was  not  the  charge  which  the  defendant  made  in  his 
speech,  and  it  was  not  in  respect  of  any  such  charge  that 
the  action  was  brought." 

All  the  particulars  of  this  kind  were  struck  out. 

No  further  appeal  was  made.  Mr.  Markham  withdrew 
his  charges  and  apologised,  and  the  action  was  withdrawn. 
What  was  done  with  the  telegrams  I  do  not  know,  but  I 
have  no.  doubt  they  soon  passed  out  of  the  possession  of 
Wernher,  Beit  &  Co. 

My  grateful  clients  paid  me  a  very  pleasant  and  graceful 
compliment. 

At  that  time  I  was  busy  as  President  of  the  City  of 
London  College  in  raising  funds  for  the  extension  of  the 
College  premises.  Without  any  communication  with  me 
Messrs.  Wernher,  Beit  &  Co.  sent  to  the  treasurer  of  the  fund 
a  cheque  for  a  thousand  guineas. 


CHAPTER    XXVI 

A   PRIVATE   MEMBER  I    1896-1899 

WHEN  I  came  back  to  parliamentary  work  at  the  beginning 
of  1896  I  took  my  seat  on  the  second  bench  above  the 
gangway,  just  behind  my  leaders.  For  the  next  four  years 
I  had  a  very  pleasant  position  in  the  House.  My  leaders, 
with  one  exception  which  I  will  mention  later  on,  were  very 
friendly,  and  constantly  let  me  into  consultation  with  them 
on  Bills  or  motions  that  were  under  discussion. 

I  did  not  speak  often,  but  the  Speaker  gave  me  all  the 
opportunities  I  desired,  and  although  after  enjoying  for 
nine  years  the  close  and  pleasant  companionships  of  a 
front  bench,  I  found  the  position  of  a  private  member 
rather  dull,  there  was  some  compensation  in  not  being 
compelled  to  constant  attendance,  and  in  being  quite  free 
to  absent  myself  from  a  debate,  or  to  pair  for  a  division. 
And  the  authorities  of  the  House  were  good  enough  to 
continue  to  me  the  valuable  privilege  of  having  a  private 
room  in  which  I  could  do  my  legal  work. 

This  largely  increased.  It  appeared  that  the  knowledge 
that  I  was  free  from  official  duties  brought  me  more  clients ; 
and  no  doubt  the  fact  that  Webster  and  Finlay  were  now 
withdrawn  from  private  practice  had  something  to  do  with  it. 

Towards  the  end  of  the  year  1896  a  new  subject,  and  one 
which  seemed  to  me  of  great  importance,  was  brought  under 
public  discussion,  and  I  gave  much  time  and  labour  to 
its  study.  It  was  the  financial  relations  between  Great 
Britain  and  Ireland.  After  the  failure  of  Mr.  Gladstone's 
Home  Rule  Scheme  in  1893,  the  Liberal  Government 
appointed  a  Royal  Commission  "  to  inquire  into  the 

332 


1896-9]  IRISH  FINANCE  333 

Financial  Relations  between  Great  Britain  and  Ireland 
and  their  relative  taxable  capacity."  It  was  a  commission 
which  consisted  almost  entirely  of  members  of  the  Liberal 
or  Nationalist  parties,  the  Unionists  having  refused  to  serve, 
and  was  probably  intended  to  assist  in  some  way  in  the 
revival  of  the  Home  Rule  Scheme.  But  for  the  examina- 
tion of  the  questions  of  financial  fact  which  it  was  directed 
to  consider  it  was  a  very  strong  commission.  Mr.  Childers, 
Lord  Farrer,  Lord  Welby,  and  Mr.  Bertram  Currie  were 
among  its  members,  and  Sir  Edward  Hamilton  and  Sir 
Robert  Giffen  were  among  the  chief  witnesses  called. 

The  commissioners  with  practical  unanimity  set  forth 
in  their  report  the  following  conclusions  : 

1.  That  Great  Britain  and  Ireland  must,  for  the  purpose 
of  this  inquiry,  be  considered  as  separate  entities.    • 

2.  That  the  Act  of  Union  imposed  upon  Ireland  a  burden 
which,  as  events  showed,  she  was  unable  to  bear. 

3.  That  the  increase  of  taxation  laid  upon  Ireland  between 
1853  and  1860  was  not  justified  by  the  then  existing  cir- 
cumstances. 

4.  That  identity  of  rates  of  taxation  does  not  necessarily 
involve  equality  of  burden. 

5.  That  whilst  the  actual  tax  revenue  of  Ireland  is  about 
one-eleventh  of  that  of  Great  Britain,  the  relative  taxable 
capacity  of  Ireland  is  very  much  smaller,  and  is  not  esti- 
mated by  any  of  us  as  exceeding  one- twentieth. 

Upon  the  publication  of  this  Report  there  arose  an 
agitation  in  Ireland  which  was  remarkable  for  the  fact  that 
Home  Rulers  and  Unionists,  Roman  Catholics  and  Protes- 
tants, all  classes  and  all  ranks,  were  in  agreement. 

I  carefully  studied  the  two  volumes  of  evidence  published 
with  the  Report,  and  satisfied  myself  that  these  con- 
clusions were  fully  proved.  And  it  appeared  to  me  that  a 
great  opportunity  was  offered  to  the  Unionist  party  for 
redressing  a  grievance  for  which  Mr.  Gladstone  was  chiefly 
responsible,  and  giving  a  conspicuous  proof  that  Ireland  could 
safely  trust  to  the  justice  of  the  Imperial  Parliament.  So 
I  devoted  to  this  subject  the  whole  of  my  annual  address 


334  A  PRIVATE  MEMBER  [CHAP,  xxvi 

to   my  constituents  on  January  4th,  1897.     I  said  at  the 
close  of  that  speech  : 

We  are  told — I  see  it  every  day — that  such  contentions 
as  I  have  been  discussing  to-night,  and  as  I  have  to  some 
extent  endorsed  and  supported,  lead  straight  in  the  direc- 
tion of  disintegration  or  Home  Rule.  I  am  of  precisely  an 
opposite  opinion.  In  my  judgement  it  is  essential  to  main- 
taining our  position  as  Unionists  that  we  should  be  prepared 
to  listen  to  complaints  of  this  kind,  and  should  be  prepared 
to  remedy  them  if  we  find  an  injustice  has  been  done.  We 
owe  justice  to  all.  We  owe  that  justice,  strict  and  scrupu- 
lous justice,  to  the  stranger  ;  and  to  one  of  our  own  house- 
hold and  family  we  owe  something  more  than  justice — we 
owe  the  most  generous  consideration,  the  most  anxious  care 
to  see  lest  there  should  have  been  any  wrong  done,  the 
most  determined  resolution  to  remedy  the  wrong  if  wrong 
there  be ;  and  I  do  not  think  we  should  be  diverted  from 
that  course  of  honour  and  of  duty  even  if  our  poorer  sister 
who  complains  that  injustice  has  been  inflicted  upon  her  is 
somewhat  querulous,  and  somewhat  unfriendly  in  the  tone 
of  her  complaint/' 1 

The  opportunity  was  unfortunately  thrown  away.  The 
Government  declined  to  accept  the  conclusions  I  have  just 
set  out,  and  announced  that  another  Royal  Commission 
would  be  appointed.  The  terms  of  reference  to  that  com- 
mission were  published.  They  were  clumsy  and  obscure, 
but  practically  covered  the  same  ground  as  had  already  been 
explored.  The  Irish  members  thereupon  claimed  and 
obtained  an  opportunity  for  debating  the  whole  question, 
and  on  March  29th,  1897,  Mr.  Blake  moved,  "  That  in  the 
opinion  of  this  House  the  Report  and  proceedings  of  the 
Royal  Commission  on  the  Financial  Relations  of  Great 
Britain  and  Ireland  establish  the  existence  of  an  undue 
burthen  of  taxation  on  Ireland  which  constitutes  a  great 
grievance  to  all  classes  of  the  Irish  community  and  makes 
it  the  duty  of  the  Government  to  propose  at  an  early  day 
remedial  legislation." 

Sir  Michael  Hicks-Beach,  as  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer, 

1  Public  Speeches,  1890-1900,  p.  96. 


1896-9]  A  LONG  SPEECH  335 

vigorously  opposed  the  motion,  but  declared  that  he 
desired  to  do  full  justice  to  the  claims  of  Ireland  under  the 
Act  of  Union,  but  needed  further  information  and  more 
time  for  consideration. 

I  spoke  at  some  length  on  the  second  night  of  the  debate. 
Indeed  it  was  the  longest  speech  I  ever  made  in  the  House 
of  Commons,  and  lasted  nearly  two  hours ;  but  the  subject 
was  complicated,  and  needed  full  as  well  as  careful  treat- 
ment. I  maintained  the  contentions  I  had  put  forward 
at  Plymouth,  and  insisted  that  no  new  commission  was 
required ;  that  the  facts  had  been  ascertained  ;  and  that 
the  question  of  remedy  was  one  for  the  House  and  the 
Government,  and  not  for  any  Royal  Commission.1  After 
three  nights'  debate  the  motion  was  defeated  by  317  to  158, 
a  strictly  party  division. 

The  proposed  new  Royal  Commission  was  not  heard  of 
any  more. 

The  grievance  which  then  existed  has  been  to  some 
extent  mitigated,  though  not  wholly  removed,  in  later  years  ; 
indeed  in  1898  the  passage  of  the  Irish  Local  Government 
Bill  was  assisted  in  the  usual  way  by  a  dole  of  three-quarters 
of  a  million  in  relief  of  rates.  But  I  have  always  regretted 
that  occasion  was  not  taken  then  to  adjust  fairly  the 
financial  relations  between  the  two  countries  with  the  help 
of  Irishmen  of  different  parties  who  might  have  been  brought 
into  direct  and  responsible  relation  with  the  English  Govern- 
ment. 

But  in  1897  the  Government  had  a  larger  majority  than  had 
been  known  since  the  passing  of  the  Reform  Bill  of  1832,  and 
it  was  believed  that  Home  Rule  had  been  finally  defeated. 

Sir  Michael  Hicks-Beach  was  very  angry  at  my  speech. 
He  had  never  been  very  friendly,  and  always  resented  my 
incursions  into  financial  questions.  He  knew  that  I  was  not 
a  sound  Free  Trader  in  the  sense  of  the  Manchester  School, 
and  on  one  occasion  when  I  had  been  to  Sheffield  in  1892, 
making  an  election  speech  for  my  friend  Bargrave  Deane, 
he  complained  of  my  advocacy  of  Fair  Trade,  and  spoke 

1  Selected  Speeches,  91. 


336  A  PRIVATE   MEMBER  [CHAP,  xxvi 

contemptuously  to  Mr.  Mundella  of  lawyers  who  thought 
they  knew  something  about  trade.  Our  relations  were 
somewhat  strained  after  the  speech  on  Irish  Finance. 

I  spent  the  autumn  of  that  year  at  Thorncote,  for 
although  the  Long  Vacation  had  begun  parliamentary  duties 
prevented  my  leaving  England,  and  at  the  end  of  September 
I  received  the  following  letter  : 

Private 

HATFIELD  HOUSE,  HATFIELD,  HERTS, 

September  ^oth,  1897. 

DEAR  SIR  EDWARD, 

It  is  possibly  known  to  .you  that  Lord  Esher  has 
intimated  that  he  cannot  resume  his  work  in  the  Courts  of 
Appeal  after  the  vacation.  In  view  of  some  communica- 
tions which  passed  between  us  with  reference  to  vacancies 
which  might  take  place  within  two  years,  you  will  probably 
expect  that  this  preface  will  be  followed  by  a  statement 
that  I  have  offered  the  Mastership  of  the  Rolls  to  Webster, 
and  should  be  happy  to  nominate  you  for  the  Attorney- 
Generalship.  I  have  made  the  offer  to  Webster — but  he 
has  declined. 

All  therefore  that  I  can'  do,  in  pursuance  of  our  under- 
standing, is  on  the  principle  of  cy  pres,  to  ask  if  you  will 
undertake  the  Mastership  of  the  Rolls.  How  such  an  offer 
will  strike  you  of  course  I  cannot  judge.  It  is  enough  for 
me  that  your  eminent  ability  and  your  indisputable  position 
at  the  Bar  entirely  authorises  me  to  submit  the  proposal 
to  your  judgement. 

Yours  very  truly, 

SALISBURY. 

I  had  no  hesitation  in  declining  the  offer,  and  sent  my 
answer  on  the  day  I  received  it. 

DEAR  LORD  SALISBURY, 

I  am  naturally  much  gratified  by  receiving  your 
kind  letter  this  morning  with  the  offer  of  the  great  dignity 
of  the  Mastership  of  the  Rolls.  It  is  a  great  honour  to  have 
been  thought  worthy  of  filling  so  high  a  judicial  post,  and 
the  pleasure  of  receiving  such  an  offer  was  much  enhanced 
by  your  very  kind  expressions  with  regard  to  myself.  You 
have  certainly  more  than  fulfilled  the  promise  you  made 


1896-9]  I   REFUSE  JUDICIAL  OFFICE  337 

two  years  ago.  But  tempting  as  in  some  respects  the  sug- 
gestion is,  I  feel  that  I  ought  to  decline  it.  The  great  loss 
of  income  which  its  acceptance  would  involve  cannot  of 
course  be  left  wholly  out  of  consideration,  but  it  is  not  this 
which  determines  my  reply. 

To  accept  a  purely  judicial  office  would  at  once  shut  me 
out  from  that  part  of  the  work  of  my  life  which  gives  me 
most  interest  and  pleasure.  The  House  of  Commons  is, 
of  course,  less  attractive  than  it  was  when  I  sat  on  the 
front  bench  and  there  enjoyed  the  constant  association  with 
those  who  were  engaged  in  the  conduct  of  public  affairs. 
But  whether  in  office  or  not,  I  hope  for  some  years  to  come 
to  retain  my  seat  in  the  House,  and  there  to  be  able  to 
render  some  service  to  you  and  to  the  party  which  is  proud 
to  follow  you.  If  at  any  time  a  vacancy  should  occur  for 
an  English  Law  Lord,  and  you  thought  me  worthy  of  the 
post,  I  would  accept  it  with  pleasure,  as  I  should  still  be 
able  to  take  part  in  those  public  affairs  which  are  not  essen- 
tially of  a  party  character.  But  for  the  time  being  I  am 
content  to  remain  at  the  Bar,  and  I  have  the  satisfaction 
of  knowing  that  there  are  others  better  fitted  than  I  for  the 
dignity  and  responsibility  of  judicial  office,  which  for  these 
reasons,  and  with  every  acknowledgement  of  your  personal 
kindness,  I  beg  to  decline. 

I  am,  dear  Lord  Salisbury, 

Very  faithfully  yours, 

EDWARD  CLARKE. 

I  have  never  regretted  my  refusal,  though  in  later  years 
I  felt  some  disappointment  at  receiving  no  further  of  er  of 
judicial  dignity.  When  I  spoke  of  others  better  fitted  than 
I  to  fill  the  post  I  was  thinking  chiefly  of  my  old  friend 
Mr.  Justice  Lindley,  and  a  little  later  I  was  delighted  to 
hear  that  he  had  been  appointed.  He  brought  to  the 
discharge  of  his  difficult  duties  patience  in  listening,  clear- 
ness of  thought,  and  firmness  of  judgement ;  and  a  know- 
ledge and  experience  far  larger  than  mine  of  the  doctrines 
and  practice  of  the  Equity  Courts.  I  have  no  doubt  that 
the  public  service  gained  by  my  refusal. 

I  need  not  give  any  narrative  of  my  doings  during  the  four 
years  which  followed  my  refusal  of  the  Mastership  of  the  Rolls. 


338  A  PRIVATE  MEMBER  [CHAP,  xxvi 

My  professional  income  continued  steadily  at  the  very 
high  level  which  it  had  reached,  and  when  the  courts  were 
sitting  I  had  very  few  hours  of  leisure. 

There  was  little  political  excitement.  In  the  House  of 
Commons  everything  was  quiet.  In  presence  of  so  strong 
a  Government  majority  the  Liberals  and  the  Irish  Nation- 
alists were  alike  helpless.  The  Irishmen  were  divided  into 
two  discordant  groups ;  no  successor  had  been  found  to 
Parnell,  Blake  was  a  failure,  and  Redmond  had  not  yet 
made  good  a  claim  to  leadership.  During  these  four  years 
there  was  a  steady  course  of  useful  legislation,  and  I  had 
the  pleasure  of  helping  to  carry  into  law  four  measures  in 
which  I  had  long  been  interested.  One  of  these  was  the 
Irish  Local  Government  Act,  which  I  had  mentioned  in  my 
Southwark  Address  in  1880  as  the  first  of  the  constructive 
measures  which  were  required  for  improving  the  condition 
of  Ireland. 

For  the  other  three  I  had  been  working  in  and  out  of 
Parliament  for  many  years. 

When  I  came  back  to  the  House  of  Commons  after  my 
temporary  exclusion  in  1880  I  found  the  House  discussing 
an  Employers'  Liability  Bill,  and  the  first  speech  I  made  as 
member  for  Plymouth  was  an  attack  on  the  judge-made 
doctrine  of  common  employment  which  had  done  so  much 
to  deprive  working  men  of  the  benefit  the  legislature  had 
intended  to  give  them.  In  1888  we  had  tried  to  pass  a  Bill 
on  this  matter.  It  was  read  a  second  time,  and  then  went 
to  a  Grand  Committee,  where  Home  Secretary  Matthews 
and  I  were  busy  many  days  in  discussing  the  clauses  with 
quite  satisfactory  results. 

Then  it  came  back  to  the  House,  and  was  opposed  and 
at  great  length  discussed.  The  session  was  nearing  its  end, 
the  pressure  of  work  was  great,  and  all  the  time  we  had 
spent  on  it  was  thrown  away  through  the  foolish  rule  which 
treats  as  waste  paper  all  the  work  that  is  not  finished  in  a 
single  session. 

In  1893  the  Liberal  Government  passed  a  Bill  through 
the  House  of  Commons  and  then  tore  it  up  in  a  fit  of  temper 


1896-9]  WORKMEN'S  COMPENSATION  339 

because  the  House  of  Lords  insisted  on  a  perfectly  reason- 
able amendment  on  which  the  House  of  Commons  had  been 
almost  equally  divided.  Speaking  at  Plymouth  in  1895,  I 
said  that  we  should  not  think  so  much  of  Employers' 
Liability  as  of  Workmen's  Compensation,  and  expressed 
my  hope  that  a  Unionist  Government  would  bring  in  a 
Workmen's  Compensation  Bill  which  would  secure  com- 
pensation to  all  workmen  injured  by  accidents  in  the  course 
of  their  employment,  without  all  the  appeals  and  all  the 
expense  which  had  retarded  the  Act  of  1880. 

In  1897  Mr.  Chamberlain  brought  in  and  passed  such  an 
Act,  and  I  gave  him  all  the  help  I  could.  When  the  Bill 
came  on  for  second  reading  there  was  some  opposition  from 
our  own  side,  and  I  made  the  strongest  speech  I  could  in 
favour  of  the  measure.  Mr.  Chamberlain  was  delighted, 
and  paid  me  an  unusual  compliment.  When  I  sat  down  he 
left  his  place  on  the  front  bench,  came  and  sat  down  beside 
me,  cordially  shook  hands,  and  warmly  thanked  me  for 
what  he  called  a  great  service. 

In  my  Southwark  Address  I  had  set  out  as  one  of  the 
matters  upon  which  I  hoped  I  might  usefully  assist  in  the 
work  of  legislation  the  removal  of  the  rule  which  prevented 
a  person  charged  with  crime  from  giving  evidence  on  his  own 
behalf  and  would  not  permit  his  wife  to  be  called  as  a 
witness,  and  I  had  lost  no  opportunity,  since  that  address 
was  written,  of  denouncing  that  rule  as  mischievous  and 
unjust.1  This  simple  and  obvious  reform  had  been  accepted 
by  the  House  of  Commons  in  1870 ;  it  had  the  support  of 
the  leading  lawyers  on  both  sides  of  the  House ;  but  it  took 
twenty-eight  years  to  carry  it.  At  last  in  1898  the  Bill 
passed  into  law,  and  I  hope  the  speech  I  made  upon  the 
second  reading  helped  to  swell  the  majority  which  then 
supported  it. 

An  experienced  and  friendly  critic  (Mr. — now  Sir  Henry — 
Lucy)  said  it  was  one  of  the  best  speeches  I  had  ever  made 
in  the  House  of  Commons.8 

1  See  Public  Speeches,  1890-1900,  p.  25. 

2  Graphic,  April  soth,  1898  ;   see  Spectator  of  same  date. 


340  A  PRIVATE  MEMBER  [CHAP,  xxvi 

There  was  yet  one  measure  in  which  I  took  a  very  special 
interest.  I  had  for  years  been  busily  engaged  at  the  London 
Municipal  Society  upon  the  subject  of  London  Local  Govern- 
ment. And  ever  since  the  year  1883  I  had  been  in  close 
and  constant  touch  with  the  Special  Committees  of  the 
Corporation  which,  under  the  able  leadership  of  Alderman 
Faudel  Phillips,  and  Mr.  (now  Sir)  Homewood  Crawford, 
had  from  time  to  time  examined  and  reported  upon  the 
various  schemes  brought  forward  for  the  reform  of  London 
Government;  schemes  which,  when  they  came  from  the 
Liberal  side,  always  involved  the  practical  destruction  of  the 
authority  and  privileges  of  the  City  Corporation. 

Indeed  in  1895  I  had  a  good  deal  to  do  with  the  prepara- 
tion of  a  Report  of  the  Special  Committee  which  not  only 
criticised  the  methods  and  combated  the  conclusions  of  the 
Courtney  Commission,  but,  as  The  Morning  Post  said,  "  con- 
tained a  complete  plan  for  the  completion  of  the  Local 
Government  of  London." 

That  plan  was  in  substance  carried  out  by  the  London 
Government  Act,  1899. 

When  that  Bill  came  on  for  second  reading  a  formal 
attack  was  made  upon  it  by  the  Opposition,  and  Mr.  Herbert 
(now  Lord)  Gladstone  moved  an  amendment  condemning 
the  Bill  because  it  failed  "  to  simplify  and  complete  the 
existing  system  and  rendered  more  difficult  the  attainment 
of  the  unity  of  London."  The  amendment  was  in  substance 
an  attack  upon  the  City,  and  I  rejoiced  to  have  an  oppor- 
tunity in  the  second  night  of  the  debate  of  vindicating  the 
great  Corporation  of  whose  tradition  and  dignity  and 
efficiency  I  as  a  citizen  born  and  bred  was  very  proud.1 
When  that  Act  was  placed  upon  the  Statute  Book  the  chief 
objects  which  had  kept  me  busy  in  Parliament  for  many 
years  had  been  accomplished,  and  my  parliamentary  life 
appeared  to  pass  into  a  quiet  phase. 

It  was  not  to  last  long,  and  there  was  a  stormy  time  before 
its  close. 

1  Selected  Speeches,  p.  242. 


CHAPTER   XXVII 

THE  WAR   IN  SOUTH  AFRICA  I 


SOON  after  the  courts  rose  for  the  Long  Vacation  in  1898 
I  went  off  with  my  eldest  son  for  a  trip  in  the  P.  &  O.  steamer 
Lusitania  to  the  northern  capitals  —  Copenhagen,  Stock- 
holm, and  St.  Petersburg.  It  was  a  delightful  trip,  full  of 
interest,  and  included  four  days  spent  at  Moscow,  and  on 
the  return  journey  an  interesting  passage  through  the  lately 
opened  Kiel  Canal. 

At  the  annual  meeting  of  the  Plymouth  Conservative 
Association  on  October  nth  I  gave  an  account  of  a  very 
notable  event  which  had  happened  in  Russia  just  as  we 
reached  its  northern  capital. 

The  first  and  principal  part  of  my  holiday  this  year  was 
given  to  a  trip  to  the  Baltic,  and  when  I  left  England  on 
August  1  7th  there  were  apprehensions  abroad  with  regard 
to  the  relations  of  this  country  with  Russia,  especially  in 
connection  with  transactions  that  were  taking  place  in 
China  —  relations  of  this  country  towards  Russia  which 
could  scarcely  be  described  as  peaceful  relations,  and 
appeared  to  many  to  indicate  the  probability  of  war.  While 
we  were  on  the  seas  the  clouds  darkened.  When  I  reached 
Stockholm  we  heard  of  strong  language  and  strong  action 
by  our  representative  at  Pekin  which  seemed  to  make  it 
very  probable  that  serious  difficulty  would  result  ;  and  when, 
on  the  morning  of  the  last  day  in  August,  we  steamed  in 
among  the  forts  of  Cronstadt  we  had  some  expectation 
that  news  might  reach  us  which  would  disappoint,  even  at 
the  last  moment,  our  hope  of  seeing  St.  Petersburg.  For- 
tunately that  apprehension  proved  to  be  unfounded,  and 
not  only  was  there  no  declaration  of  war  between  the  two 
23  341 


342  THE  WAR  IN  SOUTH  AFRICA    [CHAP,  xxvn 

countries,  but  on  the  very  day  on  which  we  had  entered 
the  roadstead  at  Cronstadt  the  Russian  Emperor  had  taken 
a  step  which  I  hope  and  believe  may,  with  the  assistance 
of  the  statesmen  and  the  peoples  of  Europe,  lead  to  a  great 
benefit  to  the  world  at  large.     He  invited  the  nations  of 
Europe  to  confer  together  as  to  the  means  of  checking  that 
great  increase  in  their  armaments  which  is  casting  so  heavy 
a  burden  upon  the  peoples,  and  upon  the  industry  of  Euro- 
pean countries.     He  took  a  notable  occasion  for  issuing 
that  invitation  to  peace.     He  chose  the  occasion  on  which 
he  was  opening  in  Moscow  the  memorial  to   the  great 
Emperor  Alexander  II,  who  in  1861  gave  freedom  to  thirty- 
five  millions  of  people  by  the  emancipation  of  the  Russian 
serfs.     The  opening  of  that  monument  to  Alexander  II  was 
in  itself  a  notable  event  in  the  history  of  Europe.     The 
scene,  the  circumstances  of  that  memorial  were  in  them- 
selves remarkable.     On  the  brow  of  the  hill  which  rises 
steeply  from  the  river  at  Moscow  there  stands  the  ancient 
Kremlin,  a  town  within  a  town.     Its  walls,  two  miles  in 
circuit,  enclose  arsenal,  palaces,  and  convents,  the  wealthiest 
treasury  that  the  world  has  to  show,  and  the  richest  shrines 
ever  dedicated  to  Christian  worship.      And  the  Kremlin 
crowns  with  its  splendour  the  manifold  beauties  of  that 
strange  city.     As  you  stand  upon  the  hill  and  look  out 
over  Moscow,  there  rise  from  wondrous  fields  of  dark  green 
roofs  the  gold  and  purple  glories  of  spire  and  dome  ;    and 
there,  at  the  spot  which  is  associated  with  all  that  is  most 
strange  and  remarkable  in  Russian  history,  the  Emperor 
inaugurated  the  splendid  monument,  not  unworthy  in  its 
grandeur  of  the  glories  of  the  Kremlin  itself,  to  Alexander  II, 
who  had  conferred  this  great  benefit  upon  the  world.     It 
was  a  remarkable  occasion.     I  believe  myself  that  what 
this  Emperor  has  done  in  1898  may  be  an  act  fuller  in 
blessing  and  benefit  to  the  world  than  even  the  great  emanci- 
pation of  the  serfs  of  Russia  in  1861.     It  is  an  invitation  to 
the  nations  to  consider  how  far  they  are  to  go  on  in  the 
rivalry  of  expensive  armaments — how  far  it  is  possible  to 
substitute   Christian    statesmanship    for   this   extravagant 
and  wild  rivalry  of  military  and  naval  expenditure/'  l 

The  appeal  of  the  Czar  was  not  wholly  neglected.     A 
conference  took  place  at  the  Hague.     The  question  of  a 
1  Selected  Speeches,  p.  277;  Public  Speeches,  1890-1900,  p.  124. 


1899-190°]  WAR  FOR  COMMERCE  343 

limitation  of  armaments  was  scarcely  discussed ;  but  some 
minor  resolutions  were  passed,  and  one  important  one  was 
unanimously  adopted — that  a  permanent  tribunal  of  nations 
should  be  established  in  Europe  to  which  when  controversies 
arose  between  them  the  questions  in  dispute  should  be 
referred  for  arbitration.  That  proposal  of  arbitration  was 
made  by  the  representative  of  Great  Britain.  How  utterly 
worthless  the  declaration  was  was  shown  by  the  conduct 
of  the  British  Government  and  the  British  people  within 
six  months  of  its  adoption. 

Meanwhile  a  singular  incident  induced  me  to  make  a  speech 
which  seriously  displeased  a  section  of  my  constituents. 

I  was  as  usual  spending  the  first  week  or  two  of  January 
among  them,  and  had  undertaken  to  propose  the  toast  of 
"  The  Port  of  Plymouth  Chamber  of  Commerce  "  at  the 
annual  dinner  of  that  Chamber,  which  was  fixed  for 
January  5th,  1899. 

On  the  morning  of  that  day  there  appeared  in  the  news- 
papers a  manifesto  of  the  Cobden  Club  which  must  have 
made  the  peace-loving  founders  of  the  Manchester  School 
shudder  in  their  graves. 

It  said  : 

The  Cobden  Club  should  so  extend  the  work  it  has 
hitherto  pursued  as  to  include  within  its  scope  a  vigilant 
observation  of  the  foreign  policy  of  the  Government  and 
an  effort  to  secure  the  constant  acceptance  of  the  views 
which  are  here  defined.  .  .  . 

That  in  any  country  now  passing  under  the  control  of 
a  foreign  power  where  England  had  already  established 
commercial  interests  she  should  insist  upon  the  policy  of 
the  open  door. 

She  can  assure  France  or  Russia  or  Germany  that  while 
she  willingly  recognises  the  absolute  right  of  each  of  them 
to  fix  whatever  tariff  suits  them  in  their  own  countries, 
where  whatever  interest  British  subjects  may  have  has 
grown  up  under  their  laws  and  government,  she  yet  cannot 
recognise  that  they  have  a  similar  right  in  countries  now 
passing  under  their  control,  and  where  Englishmen  have 
already  established  interests.  She  can  honestly  say  to 


344  THE  WAR  IN    SOUTH  AFRICA    [CHAP,  xxvn 

those  countries,  "  We  do  not  seek  to  enforce  this  as  a  right 
in  our  own  case,  and  we  dispute  and  must  continue  to  dispute 
your  claim  to  do  so." 

That  evening  in  a  speech  which  I  reprinted  under  the 
title  of  War  for  Commerce  1 1  made  my  protest  against  what 
I  described  as  "  the  very  dangerous  tendency  to  look  to 
force  as  an  agent  of  the  commercial  interests  of  this  country." 
I  declared  that  the  idea  which  was  lately  gaining  ground 
of  the  necessity  of  increasing  the  extent  of  our  territorial 
possessions  in  order  to  increase  the  volume  of  our  trade 
was  an  absolute  mistake,  and  I  added  : 

But  I  want  to  go  a  step  further  than  this.  So  far  as  I 
can  judge  of  facts  and  figures,  it  is  not  simply  that  there 
is  no  such  profit  to  be  got  by  taking  up  claims  or  by  defend- 
ing the  "  open  door  "  at  the  cost  of  war,  as  some  people 
will  think.  But  if  it  were  true  that  we  could  to  our  own 
profit  extend  our  commerce  by  force — by  war — I  should 
denounce  the  doctrine  that  we  had  a  right  to  do  it  as  a 
wicked  doctrine.  The  only  legitimate  weapons  of  com- 
mercial warfare  are  bounties  and  tariffs  ;  a  lefusal  to  deal 
with  people  who  will  not  treat  you  fairly,  the  giving  of 
special  benefits  to  those  whose  industrial  prosperity  will 
be  useful  to  yourselves.  You  may,  if  you  like,  distrust  or 
despise  those  weapons.  If  you  refuse  to  use  them,  you 
must  rely,  and  can  only  rely,  on  the  natural  advantages 
of  your  country,  and  upon  the  character,  and  the  intelli- 
gence, and  education  of  your  people.  It  is  amazing  to  me 
to  note  that  men  who  have  stood  by  unmoved  whilst  im- 
portant British  industries  were  being  destroyed  and  flour- 
ishing British  colonies  were  being  ruined,  and  have  refused 
to  do  anything  to  help  them  because  the  simple  and  just 
remedy  of  an  intercepting  duty  would  vex  their  economic 
orthodoxy  as  Free  Traders,  should  at  this  moment  appar- 
ently be  prepared  to  embark  on  a  commercial  policy  which 
means  not  advancing  the  welfare  of  the  country,  but  hin- 
dering it  and  crippling  it  by  adding  the  penalties  and 
extravagancies  of  war  to  the  work  we  are  doing  throughout 
the  world.  I  have  indicated  the  methods  of  commercial 
warfare  which,  I  believe,  are  the  only  methods  that  are 

1  Selected  Speeches,  p.  290;  Public  Speeches,  1890-1900,  p.  131. 


1899-1900]        IN   PLYMOUTH  GUILDHALL  345 

legitimate,  and  I  protest  that  if  you  pass  beyond  those 
methods  of  commercial  warfare,  and  seek  to  extend  the  area 
of  your  commerce  by  the  use  of  Maxim  guns  and  Lyddite 
shells,  and  all  the  devilish  contrivances  of  modern  war, 
you  are  embarking  on  a  policy  which  is  a  crime  in  ethics  as 
wrell  as  a  blunder  in  policy.  "  War  for  commerce  "  sounds 
a  very  innocent  phrase,  and  may  be  allowed  to  pass. 
"  Murder  for  gain  "  has  an  uglier  sound,  but  it  as  truly 
represents  the  course  of  the  policy  which  I  denounce  to-night. 

I  was  soon  made  aware  of  the  dissatisfaction  with  which 
my  speech  was  heard  and  read.  I  was  not  surprised,  for 
in  my  closing  sentences  I  had  pointed  out  that 

Plymouth,  lying  as  it  does  close  to  the  great  harbour 
associated  with  the  naval  and  military  strength  of  the 
country,  might  seem  the  most  likely  place  in  which  these 
mischievous  doctrines  might  find  their  acceptance. 

And  knowing  this  I  felt  myself  bound  to  repeat  my 
protest  with  all  the  emphasis  I  could  give  it  when  four  days 
later  I  stood  before  a  great  audience  which  crowded  the 
Guildhall. 

I  had  then  no  idea  that  it  was  the  last  time  I  should 
speak  in  that  splendid  hall  to  the  constituents  whom  for 
nearly  twenty  years  I  had  been  proud  to  represent,  but  as 
I  now  quote  the  final  passage  of  that  speech  I  can  almost 
think  that  I  had  some  premonition  of  the  future. 

I  have  spoken  strongly  in  Plymouth  this  time  with 
regard  to  this  matter.  I  am  entirely  indifferent  to  criticism, 
and  comments  which  are  made  upon  me  with  regard  to 
speaking  thus,  when  my  speaking  is  for  the  moment  not  in 
exact  accord  with  the  present  popular  feeling.  I  am  quite 
careless  of  that.  As  the  time  goes  on  you  will  have  plenty 
of  men  to  speak  to  you  whose  voices  are  simply  the  echo 
of  what  happens  to  be  the  wish  of  the  crowd  at  the  time. 
At  all  events  you  have  not  that  in  me.  It  has  been  my 
privilege  to  speak  to  you  for  many  years.  I  have  not  said 
anything  to  you  which  I  did  not  say  with  my  whole  heart, 
expressing  in  it  my  judgement — my  independent  judgement 


346  THE  WAR  IN  SOUTH  AFRICA    [CHAP,  xxvn 

— upon  public  questions.  Now  I  only  wish  to  express  the 
hope  that  as  we  go  forward  in  the  work  of  Parliament,  doing 
that  work  which  is  necessary  for  the  good  government  and 
welfare  of  the  country,  we  shall  be  supported  by  the  people, 
resolved  to  do  their  duty  to  the  world,  as  a  nation,  to  do 
that  duty  steadily  and  unflinchingly,  flinching  from  no 
sacrifice  that  is  necessary  to  enforce  their  right,  but  shrink- 
ing from  any  action  that  will  imperil  the  cause  of  peace 
unless  that  action  be  demanded  by  the  strongest  bonds  of 
national  honour  and  national  duty.1 

During  the  early  part  of  this  year  the  difficulties  with 
the  Transvaal  were  rapidly  becoming  more  serious.  Little 
was  known  by  the  public,  who  for  the  most  part  had  great 
confidence  in  Mr.  Chamberlain  and  Sir  Alfred  Milner,  who 
themselves  believed  almost  to  the  last  moment  that  there 
was  no  real  danger  of  war,  and  that  President  Kruger  would 
yield  to  all  their  demands  as  soon  as  he  could  be  brought 
to  believe  that  this  country  was  in  earnest. 

The  diplomatic  correspondence  of  the  Colonial  Office  was 
curiously  dilatory  and  unconciliatory,  but  the  Government 
seemed  to  have  little  uneasiness,  and  no  important  military 
preparations  were  made.  In  fact  but  for  an  accidental 
meeting  between  Sir  Redvers  Buller  and  Lord  Salisbury's 
private  secretary  no  serious  preparations  would  have  been 
made  at  all.  It  is  true  that  Mr.  Chamberlain  saw  Sir  Henry 
Campbell-Banner  man  and  asked  him  as  Leader  of  the 
Opposition  whether  he  would  support  the  sending  of  twenty 
thousand  of  our  troops  to  the  Cape,  but  he  explained  that 
he  did  not  think  there  would  be  any  fighting,  and  that  it 
was  part  of  a  policy  of  bluff.  Certainly  when  I  left  England 
for  my  autumn  holiday  there  was  no  general  expectation 
that  the  disputes  would  result  in  war. 

I  went  again  to  Russia.  The  trip  with  my  son  in  the 
previous  year  had  been  so  pleasant  that  I  wished  my  wife 
to  see  the  splendours  of  Moscow  and  St.  Petersburg,  and 
the  beauties  of  Stockholm  and  Christiania  and  Copenhagen. 
There  was  then  no  cloud  over  our  political  relations  with 

1  Selected  Speeches,  p.  15;  Public  Speeches,  1890-1900,  p.  123. 


1899-1900]  SIR  ROBERT   HERBERT  347 

Russia,  but  when  we  were  passing  the  Cronstadt  forts,  and 
the  customary  strict  investigation  was  made  of  the  list  of 
passengers,  the  inspecting  officer  pointed  out  that  I  had 
come  there  in  the  previous  year,  and  expressed  some 
curiosity  as  to  my  reasons  for  so  soon  repeating  the  visit. 

We  had  some  very  interesting  fellow -passengers.  The 
Dowager  Duchess  of  Cleveland  was  one  of  the  most  delight- 
ful— a  dear  old  lady,  full  of  vivacity  and  charm.  But  the 
two  with  whom  I  spent  most  of  my  time  on  board  ship  were 
Sir  Robert  Herbert  and  Sir  Andrew  Clarke. 

If  I  had  had  the  choice  of  my  companions  on  the  trip  I 
could  not  have  chosen  two  more  pleasant  and  more  valuable 
than  these  two  distinguished  men.  Sir  Robert  Wyndham 
Herbert,  a  gentleman  by  birth  and  character,  after  a  bril- 
liant career  at  Oxford,  entered  the  Civil  Service  and  rose 
to  its  highest  rank.  From  1871  to  1892  he  was  Assistant 
Under-Secret ary  at  the  Colonial  Office.  He  was  described 
by  Mr.  Chamberlain  in  one  of  his  interruptions  of  my  speech 
in  the  House  of  Commons  as  "  the  only  person  living  who 
knows  really  intimately  the  history  of  the  whole  of  this 
(South  African)  question." 

Sir  Andrew  Clarke  was  the  great  military  engineer  to 
whose  genius  and  energy  we  mainly  owe  the  great  docks  at 
Chatham,  and  Portsmouth,  and  Queenstown,  and  Keyham, 
and  Malta  and  Bermuda,  who  knew  many  colonies  and  was 
as  experienced  in  civil  administration  as  in  military  organ- 
isation, and  was  rich  in  the  varied  knowledge  which  made 
his  conversation  a  privilege  and  a  delight. 

With  these  two  distinguished  men,  both  exceptionally 
well  qualified  to  form  a  sound  opinion,  I  had  long  conver- 
sations on  South  African  affairs.  I  found  both  of  them 
gravely  uneasy.  They  were  both  apprehensive  that  war 
was  coming,  and  were  keenly  alive  to  its  difficulties.  Their 
chief  ground  of  anxiety  did  not  in  fact  when  war  actually 
broke  out  prove  nearly  so  great  a  danger  as  they  feared. 

They  knew  that  there  was  always  a  great  deal  of  unrest 
among  the  native  population,  and  were  disposed  to  think 
that  there  was  great  probability  of  a  general  native  uprising 


348  THE  WAR  IN  SOUTH  AFRICA    [CHAP,  xxvn 

in  the  event  of  a  war  between  the  two  white  races.  Of  course 
I  did  not  ask  Sir  Robert  Herbert  any  questions  about  the 
affairs  of  the  Colonial  Office,  nor  did  he  give  me  any  infor- 
mation, but  we  discussed  freely  the  facts  which  were  known 
to  the  public,  and  when  I  returned  to  England  at  the  end 
of  a  four  weeks'  trip  I  came  back  with  much  anxiety  as  to 
the  future,  and  a  resolve  to  do  all  that  might  be  possible  for 
me  to  assist  in  averting  the  calamity  of  war. 

When  we  returned  in  the  middle  of  September,  Lady 
Clarke  and  I  went  to  Sherborne  Castle  on  a  few  days'  visit 
to  my  friend  Mr.  Wingfield  Digby.  I  studied  with  great 
care  all  the  official  papers  published  during  my  absence,  and 
on  September  iQth  I  wrote  a  letter  to  The  Times,  which  was 
published  the  following  day. 

SIR, 

After  carefully  reading  this  morning  the  latest 
dispatch  of  the  Government  of  the  South  African  Republic, 
I  turned  to  your  leading  article,  and  was  greatly  surprised 
to  find  it  described  as  "  unbending  and  unconciliatory  in 
tone"  and  in  substance  "a  complete  rejection  of  the 
British  demands."  It  seems  to  me  that  this  is  an  inaccurate 
description,  and  one  which  will  seriously  mislead  the  judge- 
ment of  the  great  majority  of  your  readers,  who  will  probably 
not  take  the  trouble  to  read  the  dispatch  itself  and  to 
examine  it  in  its  relation  to  the  previous  correspondence. 

I  do  not,  however,  ask  you  to  allow  me  to  discuss  in 
your  columns  the  present  situation  of  the  Transvaal  con- 
troversy. I  can  find  an  appropriate  opportunity  of  doing 
that  when  I  address  my  constituents  next  week.  But  I 
beg  you  to  allow  me  to  call  attention  to  a  very  serious  ques- 
tion which  at  once  arises  if  the  Government  takes  the  same 
view  as  you  do  of  this  dispatch. 

You  say  that  Her  Majesty's  Ministers  must  now  recon- 
sider the  whole  position,  and  you  add  :  "A  fresh  Cabinet 
Council  will,  of  course,  be  summoned  within  the  next  few 
days,  though  possibly  Ministers  may  not  on  that  occasion 
finally  shape  those  proposals  of  their  own  for  a  final  settle- 
ment which  they  now  stand  pledged  to  formulate." 

Now,  sir,  if  this  course  be  taken,  and  if  Ministers,  as  you 
suggest,  treat  this  dispatch  as  "  necessarily  and  irrevocably 


1899-1900!       BEFORE   MY   CONSTITUENTS  349 

closing  the  chapter  opened  at  the  Bloemfontein  Conference  " 
their  first  duty  will  be  to  advise  Her  Majesty  to  call  Parlia- 
ment together  at  once. 

I  cannot  inngine  it  possible  that  they  would  take  the 
responsibility  o,  advising  the  Crown  to  declare  war  against 
the  South  African  Republic,  in  enforcement  of  a  policy  which 
has  not  yet  been  announced  or  even  formulated,  without 
taking  the  propei  means  of  ascertaining  whether  that 
policy  has  the  approval  and  support  of  the  people  of  the 
United  Kingdom.  There  may  be  reasons,  not  yet  apparent, 
which  would  justify  war  with  the  Transvaal,  but  we  have  a 
right  to  know  them  before  we  are  committed  to  such  a  war. 

Faithfully  yours, 

EDWARD  CLARKE. 

SHERBORNE  CASTLE,  SHERBORNE,  DORSET, 
September  igth,  1899. 

Then  I  went  on  to  Plymouth  to  attend  the  meeting  of  the 
Conservative  Association,  which  was  usually  held  at  the 
Royal  Hotel,  but  had  now  to  be  transferred  to  St.  Andrew's 
Hall  in  consequence  of  the  great  demand  for  tickets.  There 
I  found  myself,  on  the  evening  of  September  28th,  in 
presence  of  a  crowded  audience  which  for  the  first  time 
in  my  experience  of  Plymouth  Conservative  meetings  was 
restless  and  uneasy,  and  even  at  times  disposed  to  be 
tumultuous.  A  London  newspaper  proprietor  who  had 
been  attending  a  wedding  breakfast  that  day  was  the  most 
prominent  of  the  interrupters.  The  excitement  was  owing 
to  the  fact  that  a  few  days  earlier  the  Executive  Council 
of  the  Conservative  party  had  passed  a  resolution  which 
was  officially  communicated  to  me  expressing  a  very 
definite  approval  of  the  course  which  the  Government 
had  been  taking  in  recent  South  African  affairs.  It  appeared 
to  be  generally  believed  that  this  was  intended  as  a  censure 
upon  me  for  my  letter  to  The  Times  and  an  expression  of 
want  of  confidence  in  the  course  that  I  was  taking  upon 
this  question. 

At  the  opening  of  my  speech  I  said  : 

I  really  do  not  know  whether  in  the  minds  of  those  who 
proposed  that  resolution   and  carried  it   there  was  any 


350  THE  WAR  IN  SOUTH  AFRICA      [CHAP,  xxvii 

such  intention,  and,  of  course,  I  should  not  ask  questions 
upon  the  subject.  But  the  fact  that  it  was  passed  leads 
me  to  make,  here  and  now,  a  very  definite  statement.  If  my 
constituents  disapprove  of  the  course  I  have  taken  in 
writing  that  letter  to  The  Times,  or  if  they  disapprove  of 
the  opinions  I  express  upon  a  great  public  question  to-night, 
I  hope  they  will  have  another  meeting  of  the  Conservative 
Executive  in  the  course  of  next  week,  and,  if  they  dis- 
approve of  my  action,  will  tell  me  so.  I  have  not  the 
least  desire  to  speak  in  Parliament  in  the  name  of  those 
who  do  not  agree  with  my  opinions,  and  if  next  week — I 
was  going  to  say  to-night,  but  perhaps  a  little  reflection 
might  be  desirable — if  next  week  a  resolution  should  be 
passed  by  the  Conservative  Executive  disapproving  of  the 
course  I  am  taking,  I  shall  within  twenty-four  hours  resign 
my  seat  for  Plymouth — and  I  will  pledge  myself  not  to 
embarrass  the  party  by  which  I  have  been  so  long  supported. 
I  would  not  stand  at  the  by-election  which  would  follow 
on  my  vacating  the  seat,  for  I  will  never  condescend  to  get 
a  seat  in  Parliament  by  the  votes  of  those  who  have  been 
opposed  to  me  outvoting  my  supporters.  There  is  no 
question  of  temper,  or  of  hurt  feelings,  or  anything  of  that 
kind  in  the  matter  ;  only  I  want  to  make  it  perfectly  clear 
that  I  will  not  represent  a  constituency  in  which  my  political 
supporters  disapprove  of  the  course  I  am  taking,  and  it 
is  entirely  in  the  hands  of  the  Conservative  Association  to 
end,  if  they  please,  my  political  connection  with  Plymouth 
next  week.  I  think  it  desirable  to  make  that  perfectly 
definite  statement,  because  the  moment  it  is  made  I  am 
going  to  address  you  precisely  as  if  no  such  resolution  had 
been  passed. 

Then  I  turned  to  an  account  of  the  correspondence  which 
had  passed  between  the  Colonial  Office  and  the  Govern- 
ment of  the  Transvaal  since  the  date  of  the  Jameson  raid, 
and  after  a  full  and  careful  examination  of  that  correspond- 
ence I  said, 

I  refuse  to  believe  that  the  Government,  which  has  served 
the  country  so  well  in  the  cause  of  peace,  will  now  allow  a 
clumsy  correspondence  to  issue  in  an  unnecessary  war. 

Again  I  hesitate  to  quote  further  from  one  of  my  old 


1899-1900]  MY   PROTEST  351 

speeches,  for  old  speeches  are  not  attractive,  but  this  is 
the  story  of  my  life  at  one  of  its  most  important  crises, 
and  if  another  were  writing  that  story  I  think  he  would 
feel  bound  to  cite  the  close  of  this  speech,  not  for  any  merit 
in  the  passage  itself,  but  because  it  is  the  best  account  that 
can  be  given  of  the  feelings  with  which  I  entered  upon 
the  parliamentary  conflict  which  has  now  to  be  recorded. 
My  action  cost  me  my  seat  in  Parliament,  and  in  the  result 
defeated  a  long-cherished  ambition,  but  I  look  back  upon 
it  now  with  more  satisfaction  than  upon  any  other  part  of 
my  political  career. 

I  have  confidence  in  the  Government,  but  there  are 
dangers  about.  The  people  of  this  country  are  hot-tempered, 
speak  strongly,  speak  quickly,  and  have  memories  for  what 
they  consider — and  rightly  consider — to  have  been  sad 
events  in  the  past.  For  one  man  in  England  to-day  who  is 
in  favour  of  war  because  of  the  interests  of  the  Outlanders 
there  are  a  dozen  who  are  ready  to  shout  for  war  because 
they  want  to  avenge  Majuba  Hill.  But  how  long  ago  was 
Majuba  Hill  ?  If  Majuba  Hill  were  to  be  avenged  at  all, 
the  time  was  then,  not  now.  Between  Majuba  Hill  and  us 
there  have  passed  eighteen  years  during  which  we  have 
made  conventions,  and  we  have  treated  with,  and  have 
assured  of  our  friendship,  that  Republic  against  which  a 
stormy  and  tempestuous  portion  of  our  people  are  willing 
now  to  make  war  in  order  to  avenge  Majuba  Hill. 

It  would  be  a  disgrace  to  the  country  to  enter  into  war. 
What  one  wants  to  guard  against  is  the  overwhelming 
passion  of  the  moment,  and  the  effect  that  may  be  produced 
by  the  clamorous  ignorance  of  the  theatres  and  the  streets. 
It  is  time — is  it  not  ? — for  those  of  us  who  feel  deeply  on 
matters  like  this  to  make  an  appeal  to  the  conscience  of 
the  people  of  this  country.  It  is  time  to  remind  our  country- 
men of  the  greatest  poem  that  has  been  written  by  any 
living  man,  and  the  majestic  appeal  that  was  made  to  us  a 
little  time  ago  : 

God  of  our  fathers,  known  of  old — 
Lord  of  our  far-flung  battle  line — 
Beneath  Whose  awful  Hand  we  hold 
Dominion  over  palm  and  pine — 
Lord  God  of  Hosts,  be  with  us  yet, 
Lest  we  forget — lest  we  forget  I 


352  THE  WAR  IN   SOUTH  AFRICA    [CHAP,  xxvn 

Lest  we  forget  that  our  wealth  and  strength  and  the  splendid 
range  of  our  imperial  sway  bring  to  us  responsibility  as  well 
as  privilege.  We  claim — we  claim  it  thankfully  and  not 
boastfully — that  we  are  in  the  very  van  of  the  civilisation 
of  mankind.  Our  ships  are  on  every  sea  ;  our  traders  are 
in  every  market ;  our  English  tongue  is  fast  becoming 
the  language  of  the  world.  On  every  distant  continent  there 
are  growing  up  colonies  sprung  from  our  loins  and  carrying 
forward  our  traditions  of  freedom  and  of  order.  Let  us 
rise  to  our  great  mission.  Let  us  show  that  we  are  capable 
of  a  calm  and  patient  and  manly  spirit  in  dealing  with 
international  affairs — prompt  to  resent  insult,  steadfast  in 
the  protection  of  our  national  interests,  ready  to  act  for  the 
protection  of  our  countrymen  under  whatever  government 
they  live ;  but  at  the  same  time  having  the  manliness  to 
acknowledge  mistakes  which  we  ourselves  have  made,  to 
make  allowance  for  the  ignorance,  for  the  prejudice,  for  the 
suspicions  of  others — and  to  remember  that  it  is  easier 
and  nobler  for  the  strong  to  be  generous  than  it  is  for  the 
weak  to  be  submissive.  So  shall  we  show  to  the  world 
the  policy  and  pattern  of  a  Christian  State,  so  shall  we 
give  the  world  the  blessings  of,  peace,  and  give,  too,  to  the 
dear  country  of  our  birth  the  greatest  of  all  honour  it  can 
have.1 

The  publication  of  this  speech  caused  some  stir.  In 
some  of  the  London  newspapers,  especially  those  with 
which  our  London  visitor  was  connected,  there  were  violent 
attacks  upon  me.  I  had  arranged  to  speak  at  Conservative 
meetings,  at  Penarth  on  October  3rd,  and  at  Newtown, 
Montgomeryshire  and  after  spending  the  week-end  at 
Maristow  with  my  old  and  staunch  friend  Sir  Massey 
Lopes,  Lady  Clarke  and  I  went  on  the  Monday  to  the  Royal 
Hotel,  Bristol,  on  our  way  to  keep  these  engagements.  There 
I  received  letters  telling  me  that  both  meetings  had  been 
abandoned.  And  a  torrent  of  letters  poured  in  upon  me, 
some  from  friends,  congratulating  or  remonstrating ;  the 
larger  number,  mostly  anonymous,  full  of  violent  abuse. 

On  the  Tuesday  the  Plymouth  Executive  Committee  met 

*  Selected  Speeches,  p.  219  ;    Public  Speeches,  1890-1900,  p.  1^6. 


1899-19°°]     A  DISTURBED  CONSTITUENCY  353 

and  discussed  the  situation  at  great  length.  No  resolution 
was  passed,  and  the  meeting  adjourned  sine  die;  but  the 
chairman  had  promised  to  write  to  me  asking  for  an  under- 
taking that  when  Parliament  met  I  would  vote  with  the 
Ministry.  That  undertaking  I  refused  to  give. 


ROYAL  HOTEL,  COLLEGE  GREEN,  BRISTOL, 

October  $th,  1899. 

DEAR  MR.  MAY, 

I  have  just  received  your  letter  in  which  by  direction 
of  the  Executive  Committee  you  ask  me  "  whether  when 
Parliament  meets  to  consider  our  difficulties  with  the 
Transvaal  "  I  shall  "be  prepared  to  vote  with  the  Ministry." 
I  fear  that  Parliament  will  have  little  opportunity  for  any 
useful  discussion  of  our  difficulties  with  the  Transvaal.  It 
appears  to  me  probable  that  by  the  time  it  meets  this 
country  will  be  already  at  war  with  the  South  African 
Republic,  and  when  hostilities  have  once  commenced  I  have 
no  doubt  Parliament  will  at  once  grant  all  necessary  supplies, 
as  our  best  hope  then  will  be  that  by  a  prompt  and  over- 
whelming success  in  arms  we  may  the  more  speedily  arrive 
at  an  honourable  and  lasting  peace.  But  holding  the 
opinion  which  I  stated  last  week  at  Plymouth  as  to  the 
real  cause  of  this  unhappy  conflict  it  is  impossible  for  me 
to  give  the  pledge  for  which  you  ask.  I  must  hold  myself 
absolutely  free  to  vote  according  to  my  convictions  upon 
any  motion  which  may  come  before  the  House  of  Commons. 
It  is  for  my  supporters  in  Plymouth  to  decide  whether  they 
will  grant  or  refuse  me  this  freedom. 

In  the  following  week  the  Executive  Council  met,  and 
passed  a  resolution  affirming  that  to  which  I  had  referred 
at  the  meeting  at  St.  Andrew's  Hall, and  added,  "Bearing 
in  mind  the  splendid  services  Sir  Edward  Clarke  has  for  the 
past  twenty  years  rendered  to  the  Conservative  cause  and 
to  the  best  interests  of  the  country,  this  council  refuses  to 
believe  that  he  will  take  any  action  in  Parliament  likely  to 
embarrass  Her  Majesty's  Government  on  the  Transvaal 
question." 

I  acknowledged  this  resolution  in  the  following  letter : 


354  THE  WAR  IN  SOUTH  AFRICA    [CHAP,  xxvn 

37,  RUSSELL  SQUARE, 
October  i6th,  1899. 

MY  DEAR  MR.  MAY, 

I  have  received  with  much  satisfaction  the  resolu- 
tion of  the  Conservative  Council  at  Plymouth.  The  council 
is  quite  right  in  refusing  to  believe  that  I  shall  do  anything 
at  this  juncture  to  embarrass  Her  Majesty's  Government. 
At  any  proper  time  and  occasion  I  shall  be  prepared  to 
repeat  and  justify  the  opinions  I  expressed  at  Plymouth  on 
September  28th.  But  the  situation  has  entirely  changed. 
War  has  begun,  and  honour,  policy,  and  humanity  alike 
demand  that  it  shall  be  pressed  forward  with  unsparing 
energy.  In  that  task  I  trust  the  Government  will  receive 
the  united  support  of  Parliament  and  the  country.  It  would 
have  been  to  me  a  matter  of  sincere  regret  if  my  long  con- 
nection with  Plymouth,  to  which  the  resolution  makes  such 
kindly  reference,  had  come  to  a  sudden  close  by  reason  of 
any  expression  of  an  independent  opinion  upon  a  subject 
of  grave  national  importance. 

Very  faithfully  yours, 

EDWARD  CLARKE. 


Meanwhile  on  October  yth  a  Royal  Proclamation  was 
issued  summoning  Parliament  to  meet  on  the  I7th.  By 
that  date,  as  I  had  anticipated,  the  war  had  begun. 

The  most  favourable  time  of  year  for  the  Boers  to  begin 
warlike  operations  had  arrived.  President  Kruger  was 
convinced  that  further  negotiation  would  only  be  used  by 
the  British  Government  as  a  means  of  gaining  time  to 
complete  their  somewhat  tardy  military  preparations,  and 
naturally  determined  to  strike  at  once.  On  October  9th 
he  delivered  an  ultimatum,  containing  demands  which  he 
knew  Great  Britain  must  refuse,  and  on  the  I2th  the  first 
shot  in  the  war  was  fired. 

On  the  17 th  Parliament  met,  and  on  the  following  day 
an  amendment  to  the  Address  to  the  Crown  was  moved  in 
the  House  of  Commons  by  Mr.  Philip  Stanhope  (now  Lord 
Weardale).  He  proposed  the  addition  to  the  Address  of 
the  words,  "  But  we  humbly  represent  to  your  Majesty  our 
strong  disapproval  of  the  conduct  of  the  negotiations  with 


1899-1900]  IN  THE  HOUSE  355 

the  Government  of  the  Transvaal  which  have  involved 
us  in  hostilities  with  the  two  South  African  Republics." 

The  motion  was  ill-conceived,  and  the  debate  was  not 
very  vigorously  conducted  by  the  Opposition. 

Indeed  it  was  believed  that  some  of  their  leaders  felt  that 
it  was  a  mistake,  now  that  hostilities  had  actually  begun, 
to  propose  a  vote  of  censure  upon  which  the  Government 
were  sure  of  a  large  majority.  To  make  a  party  attack 
upon  the  Government  at  that  moment,  at  the  very  time 
when  it  had  to  meet  the  heavy  responsibility  of  con- 
ducting such  a  war,  and  when  the  success  of  the  motion, 
even  if  success  were  possible,  would  have  forced  an  immediate 
General  Election  with  its  temporary  paralysis  of  adminis- 
trative action,  was  generally  felt  to  be  an  unpatriotic  course. 
The  Liberals  paid  heavily  for  their  blunder  when  the  General 
Election  twelve  months  later  gave  the  Unionist  party  another 
six  years  of  office. 

I  spoke  on  the  second  night  of  the  debate,  and  in  my 
opening  sentences  explained  why  I  felt  bound  to  do  so. 

Mr.  Speaker,  I  think  the  House  will  understand  that  it 
is  with  reluctance  I  take  part  in  this  debate.  The  matter 
is  a  grave  and  serious  one,  and  I  wish  I  could  hope  that 
what  I  must  say  on  the  subject  will  be  welcome  and  pleasant 
to  friends  sitting  around  me.  But  I  ask  their  forbearance. 
I  will  make  no  large  claim  upon  their  patience,  but  there 
are  things  which  it  is  my  duty  to  say,  to-night.  I  have 
spoken  on  this  subject  outside  the  House,  and  having  so 
spoken,  after  what  has  been  said  I  feel  it  my  duty  to  join 
in  this  debate.  The  Leader  of  the  House,  in  answer  to  an 
attack  hinted  at  by  the  Leader  of  the  Opposition,  but  which 
the  right  hon.  gentleman  does  not  appear  to  have  the 
courage  to  make  directly,  said  that  if  the  Government  had 
been  guilty  of  errors  in  the  conduct  of  these  negotiations, 
he  would  like  to  have  those  errors  made  known  in  the 
presence  of  the  representatives  of  the  people. 

It  is  because  I  have  said  elsewhere,  and  am  prepared  to 
say  here,  that  I  think  there  have  been  errors  in  the  conduct 
of  the  negotiations  that  I  am  bound  this  evening  to  state 
clearly  and  distinctly  what  these  errors  are.  Since  I  made 


356  THE  WAR  IN  SOUTH  AFRICA    [CHAP,  xxvii 

that  speech,  a  fortnight  or  more  ago,  I  have  read  with  the 
utmost  care  all  that  has  appeared  in  the  Blue  books  and 
in  the  public  prints  in  regard  to  this  matter.  I  have  listened 
to-night  to  the  speech  of  the  Colonial  Secretary,  and  if  I 
had  found  it  possible  to  get  up  and  tell  the  House  that  I 
found  I  had  made  a  mistake,  that  my  opinion  was  expressed 
too  harshly,  or  upon  imperfect  knowledge,  I  hope  I  should 
have  had  the  courage — and  it  would  require  less  courage 
than  the  speech  I  have  to  make  to-night — to  acknowledge 
my  blunder.  I  would  rather  have  confessed  to  a  personal 
blunder  or  mistake  than  say  a  word  in  the  nature  of  an  attack 
on  the  Government  or  any  member  of  the  Government. 

But  I  am  bound  to  say  that  the  more  I  read  of  the 
correspondence  and  learn  the  circumstances  of  the  case, 
the  more  I  am  convinced  of  the  errors  in  the  negotiations, 
and  that  this  lamentable  war  is  absolutely  unnecessary.1 

Then  I  proceeded  to  deal  with  the  history  of  the  nego- 
tiations, repeating  in  substance,  with  some  not  unimportant 
additions,  the  detailed  account  of  them  which  I  had  given 
at  Plymouth. 

Quite  as  important  as  anything  I  myself  said  were  the 
interruptions  of  Mr.  Chamberlain.  He  practically  offered 
himself  for  cross-examination,  and  then  in  his  answers  to 
questions  firmly  pressed  (one  answer  he  afterwards  said  he 
could  not  believe  he  could  have  given) 2  he  gave  even  greater 
force  to  the  criticism  I  was  making. 

I  need  not  here  quote  from  this  part  of  my  speech,  or 
say  anything  upon  the  points  which  were  in  issue  between 
us.  I  gave  a  full  and  complete  statement  of  my  side  of  the 
controversy,  and  I  hope  that  any  who  are  still  interested 
in  this  historical  question  will  do  me  the  justice  to  read  the 
whole  speech. 

But  I  remember  that  once,  in  1879,  when  I  went  with 
Lord  John  Manners  and  Sir  Hardinge  Gifiard  to  a  meeting 
in  support  of  the  candidature  for  Marylebone  of  Mr.  William 
Forsyth,  the  author  of  Hortensius,  the  candidate,  who  was 
rather  a  dull  man,  from  whom  no  one  would  expect  an 

1  Selected  Speeches,  p.  221. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  238  ;   see  Hansard,  series  4,  vol.  Ixxvii,  p.  311, 


1899-1900]       FACING  THE  CONSEQUENCES  357 

epigram,  excused  himself  for  not  dwelling  on  the  causes 
of  theCrimean  War  which  had  ended  twenty-five  years  before, 
by  saying  "That  has  passed  into  history  and  been  for- 
gotten." I  have  often  realised  how  much  truth  there  was 
in  the  saying. 

There  are  few  now  who  take  much  interest  in  the  causes 
of  our  war  with  the  Transvaal ;  its  consequences  in  the 
condition  of  the  world  to-day  are  too  absorbing.  But  I 
hope  that  those  few  will  find  in  this  speech  a  complete 
justification  of  the  course  I  took  at  the  most  difficult  crisis 
of  my  public  career. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  this  story  of  my  life  that  I  should 
discuss  the  question  whether  I  was  right  or  wrong  in  the 
judgement  I  formed.  But  I  think  the  closing  passage  of  the 
speech,  in  which  I  referred  to  my  personal  position,  speaking 
as  I  did  with  the  belief  that  it  was  probably  the  last  time  I 
should  address  the  House  as  member  for  Plymouth,  is 
needed  to  make  this  story  complete. 

I  should  like  to  say  one  personal  word  to  the  hon. 
friends  around  me.  I  have  been  for  thirty  years  in  active 
political  life.  I  have  been  for  twenty  years  a  diligent 
worker  in  the  affairs  of  this  House.  I  think  I  can  say  that 
during  that  time  I  have  been  unwavering  in  my  fidelity  to 
the  leaders  of  my  party  in  this  House.  Except  on  one 
occasion,  when  I  made  a  speech  with  regard  to  the  financial 
relations  of  Ireland,  I  have  not  in  this  House  spoken  against 
the  course  which  my  leaders  were  taking.  It  is,  therefore, 
a  great  pain  to  me  to  speak  so  now.  But  my  work  for  the 
party  has  been  amply  and  completely  rewarded.  No  sort 
of  reward  or  gratitude  remains  due  to  me  from  the  party 
or  its  leaders.  It  has  been  rewarded  by  my  being 
permitted  for  some  years  to  be  one  of  the  Law  Officers  of 
the  Crown  ;  it  has  been  rewarded  more  than  that  by  the 
constant  friendship,  and  I  hope  I  may  say  the  confidence, 
of  the  right  hon.  gentleman  whose  follower  I  am  proud  to 
be.  A  reward  too  has  been  given  to  me  which  is,  perhaps, 
better  than  anything  else,  and  that  has  been  the  opportunity 
of  taking  a  sometimes  not  inconspicuous  part  in  the  dis- 
cussions of  this  House.  But  I  am  bound  to  speak  thus. 
24 


358  THE  WAR  IN  SOUTH  AFRICA        [CHAP,  xxvn 

No  man  can  know  that  he  is  right,  but  he  can  know  whether 
his  opinion  is  an  honest  one,  whether  it  is  absolutely 
unbiased  by  any  question  of  personal  interest,  or  by  the 
more  subtle  influence  of  personal  antagonism.  I  know 
that  my  opinion  is  an  honest  one,  though  it  may  not  be 
right.  I  hope  by  and  by  my  hon.  friends  who  are  now 
feeling  angry  and  hurt  at  my  conduct  may  remember  that 
there  is  a  deeper  and  a  truer  loyalty  to  party  than  that 
loyalty  which  is  expressed  in  the  constant  going  into  the 
division  lobby  at  the  bidding  of  the  Whip. 

I  think  they  will  acquit  me  of  any  disloyalty  to  the 
party  in  having  striven,  as  I  have  done,  to  prevent  my 
country  suffering  the  calamity,  and  my  party  suffering  the 
reproach,  of  having  embarked  on  a  unnecessary  war.1 

My  appeal  to  my  friends  in  the  House  of  Commons  was 
generously  answered.  There  were  not  a  few  among  them 
who  shared  my  opinion  as  to  the  conduct  of  the  negotiations 
which  had  so  lamentably  failed,  but  felt,  as  did  I,  that  the 
clear  duty  of  Parliament  was  to  give  unflinching  support 
to  the  Ministers  in  their  efforts  to  deal  with  a  very  dangerous 
situation  in  South  Africa.  But  whether  they  agreed  with 
me  or  not  they  recognised  my  sincerity,  and  I  did  not  lose 
a  single  friendship.  But  outside  I  was  heartily  abused  in 
the  Press  and  on  platforms,  and  at  Plymouth  the  situation 
soon  became  very  difficult. 

The  attacks  in  the  Press  did  not  trouble  me  much,  and 
I  recollect  them  now  with  some  pleasure,  for  they  gave 
occasion  for  a  very  generous  action  on  the  part  of  one  of 
my  friends.  In  The  Evening  News  of  October  25th  there 
appeared  a  paragraph  describing  an  election  meeting  at 
Bow,  in  which  it  was  said  that  when  the  reason  of  my  oppo- 
sition to  the  war  was  known — "  the  chagrin  of  a  disappointed 
man" — its  importance  dwindled  to  a  pin's  head. 

I  did  not  see  the  paragraph;  but  a  day  or  two  later  a 
friend  showed  me  a  letter  which  had  appeared  in  large 
type  in  The  Evening  News  of  the  following  day  over  the 
signature  of  Mr.  Alfred  Harmsworth  (now  Lord  North- 
cliffe),  one  of  the  proprietors  of  the  paper. 

1  Selected  Speeches,  p.  234. 


1899-1900]  A  GENEROUS   LETTER  359 

I  cannot  deny  myself  the  pleasure  of  quoting  it  in  full : 

To  the  Editor  of  "  The  Evening  News." 

SIR, 

I  notice  in  an  article  on  the  Bow  election  in  yester- 
day's Evening  News  that  your  reporter  attributes  Sir  Edward 
Clarke's  attitude  on  the  Transvaal  question  to  "  the  chagrin 
of  a  disappointed  man." 

I  have  had  the  honour  to  know  Sir  Edward  Clarke  since 
I  was  a  child,  and  I  take  this  opportunity  of  stating  emphati- 
cally that  you  are  absolutely  in  error  in  making  such  a 
charge.  Though  I  disagree  entirely  with  Sir  Edward 
Clarke  as  regards  both  his  Venezuela  and  his  Transvaal 
speeches,  I  should  count  it  a  great  misfortune  for  the 
country  if  we  had  not  among  us  men  of  his  independence 
of  character.  It  is  not  a  grateful  task  to  place  one's  self, 
as  Sir  Edward  Clarke  has  done,  in  opposition  to  one's  own 
party  and  nine-tenths  of  the  public  opinion  of  the  country. 

I  am,  yours,  etc., 

ALFRED  HARMS  WORTH. 

Daily  Mail  OFFICE. 

At  Plymouth,  during  the  whole  time  of  my  long  member- 
ship political  parties  had  been  very  evenly  balanced.  I  had 
indeed  been  successful  at  five  contested  elections,  but,  save 
in  1886,  when  circumstances  were  quite  exceptional,  my 
majority  had  never  exceeded  160  on  a  poll  of  over  10,000. 
In  1895  we  had  lost  one  seat  to  the  Liberals,  and  at  the 
by-election  in  1898,  caused  by  the  death  of  Mr.  Charles 
Harrison,  we  had  failed  to  regain  it,  although  we  had  a  good 
candidate  in  Mr.  Ivor  Guest  (now  Lord  Wimborne),  a  good 
speaker,  with  an  attractive  personality,  and  the  useful 
backing  of  the  Wimborne  influence  and  wealth. 

It  was  not  unlikely  that  if  I  stood  again  at  a  General 
Election  I  should  be  successful;  for  I  think  the  bulk  of  my 
old  supporters  would  have  stood  by  me,  and  I  should  have 
had  many  votes  from  Liberals  who  agreed  with  my  opinions 
upon  the  war,  and  would  have  been  unwilling  to  part  with 
their  old  member.  But  this  would  involve  the  breaking 
up  of  the  Unionist  party ;  and  it  was  evident  that  the  work 


360  THE  WAR  IN  SOUTH  AFRICA    [CHAP,  xxvn 

of  the  party  organisation  would  be  crippled  so  long  as  every 
ward  committee  was  divided,  and  every  meeting  disturbed 
by  the  differences  which  my  action  had  caused. 

Mr.  May,  the  Conservative  chairman,  and  Mr.  John 
Shelly,  the  chairman  of  the  Liberal  Unionists,  came  to 
London  to  see  me,  and  we  had  long  consultations. 

It  was  obviously  my  duty  to  remove  the  personal  difficulty 
as  soon  as  possible,  and  I  took  the  only  course  which  seemed 
likely  to  be  effectual.  On  November  25th  I  sent  Mr.  May 
a  letter  for  publication  saying  that  I  should  not  again 
offer  myself  as  a  candidate  for  the  representation  of  the 
borough.  I  received  at  once  many  remonstrances,  and 
some  of  my  old  friends  thought  I  was  being  shabbily  treated 
and  expressed  their  indignation  pretty  strongly.  So  I 
wrote  to  one  of  them  a  full  explanation  of  my  action. 

Your  letter  is  one  of  many  that  I  am  receiving  from 
old  friends  and  supporters  who  do  not  desire  to  accept  as 
final  the  announcement  that  was  made  last  week.  Of  course 
it  is  pleasant  to  me  to  note  the  strength  and  extent  of  this 
feeling,  but  if  it  were  publicly  expressed  it  would  do  the 
very  mischief  which  I  am  trying  to  prevent.  We  have 
a  majority  at  Plymouth ;  but  it  is  not  a  large  one,  and  we 
can  only  get  both  seats  by  good  organisation  and  absolute 
unity  between  the  two  candidates.  We  have  had  two 
interesting  experiences,  one  very  pleasant,  the  other  very 
disappointing.  In  1892  Sir  William  Pearce  and  I  polled 
exactly  the  same  number  of  votes  (5,081)  and  won  both 
seats.  In  1895,  at  three  o'clock  in  the  afternoon,  both 
sides  thought  that  Mr.  Hubbard  and  I  were  winning.  Some 
of  my  old  friends  were  anxious  to  see  me  at  the  top  of  the 
poll,  and  plumped  for  me.  Forty-two  did  so,  and  Mr. 
Hubbard  was  beaten  by  twenty- six.  At  the  next  election 
to  Parliament  there  will  be  a  division  in  the  ranks  of  our 
opponents,  and  if  our  people  are  absolutely  united  I  think 
we  must  get  both  seats.  But  I  implore  my  friends  not  to 
allow  any  feeling  of  sympathy  with  me  to  induce  them  to 
let  the  idea  get  about  that  I  have  been  in  any  way  ill- 
treated.  It  is  not  so.  I  recognise  the  actual  condition 
of  political  affairs,  and  I,  without  hesitation  and  without 
complaint,  stand  aside  when  I  can  be  no  longer  useful. 


1899-1900]  ONE   MORE  SPEECH  361 

I  spoke  once  more  to  the  House  of  Commons  on 
February  2nd,  1900,  in  the  course  of  the  six  nights'  debate 
upon  another  amendment  to  the  Address.  Mine  was  not 
a  controversial  speech,  and  I  appealed  to  the  leaders  of  the 
Opposition  not  to  insist  upon  a  division  which  would  be 
misunderstood  and  misconstrued  abroad.  I  said, 

I,  for  one,  will  gladly  vote  with  the  Government,  because 
now,  when  the  war  is  waging,  when  it  is  impossible  to  stop 
the  war  without  doing  more  mischief  to  our  Empire  and 
producing  more  misery  in  the  world,  we  must  carry  the 
war  to  its  ultimate  conclusion  ;  that  is  the  successful  issue 
of  our  arms,  and  the  establishment  of  a  satisfactory  state 
of  things  in  South  Africa. 

But  I  urged  that  no  declaration  should  be  made  by  the 
Government  which  would  close  the  way  to  an  honourable 
settlement  with  our  opponents,  and  I  suggested  that  the 
Prime  Minister  should  take  under  his  own  control  the 
correspondence  of  the  Colonial  Office  with  South  Africa, 
and  that  Lord  Rosebery  should  be  asked  to  go  out  and 
deal  with  the  solution  of  the  difficulties  there.1  This  sug- 
gestion was  of  course  keenly  resented  by  Mr.  Chamber- 
lain's friends. 

Meanwhile  the  situation  at  Plymouth  had  somewhat 
changed.  Very  soon  after  my  speech  there  in  September 
it  was  suggested  in  The  Western  Morning  News  that  an 
immediate  by-election  would  probably  result  in  the  un- 
opposed return  of  Mr.  Ivor  Guest.  As  the  weeks  went  by 
it  was  clear  that  the  tide  of  public  opinion  was  running 
strongly  in  favour  of  the  Government.  At  the  municipal 
elections  at  the  beginning  of  November  there  were  great 
Conservative  gains.  In  Plymouth  there  was  a  contest 
in  Compton  Ward,  and  the  Conservative  beat  his  opponent 
by  two  to  one.  At  Exeter  Henry  Northcote  vacated  his 
seat  on  being  appointed  Governor  of  Bombay,  and  Sir 
Edgar  Vincent  defeated  the  Liberal  candidate  by  a  greatly 
increased  majority.  The  leaders  at  Plymouth  had  reason 

1  Selected  Speeches,  p.  235. 


362  THE  WAR   IN   SOUTH  AFRICA    [CHAP,  xxvn 

to  believe  that  the  Liberals  would  not  bring  forward  a 
candidate  at  a  by-election,  and  quite  rightly  thought 
that  the  immediate  election  of  Mr.  Guest,  coupled  with  my 
determination  not  to  be  a  candidate  at  the  General  Elec- 
tion, would  put  an  end  to  their  difficulties. 

On  February  9th  I  received  a  letter  asking  me  to  resign. 
That  evening  I  paid  my  last  visit  to  the  House.  Lady 
Clarke  came  down  and  dined  with  me  there,  and  I  sent 
in  my  application  for  the  Chiltern  Hundreds. 

On  February  loth,  1900,  I  ceased  to  be  a  Member  of 
Parliament. 


CHAPTER    XXVIII 
OUT  OF  PARLIAMENT:  1900-1905 

IT  seemed  very  strange  to  me  at  first  to  be  no  longer  a 
Member  of  Parliament.  My  thoughts  and  studies  and  the 
arrangements  of  my  life  had  been  for  twenty  years  so  much 
influenced  and  almost  determined  by  my  duties  at  the 
House  of  Commons,  and  my  hopes  for  the  future  had  been 
so  closely  interwoven  with  that  political  work,  that  it  was 
hard  to  realise  that  occupation  and  hopes  had  all  suddenly 
disappeared.  And  I  sorely  missed  the  constant  companion- 
ship of  the  friends  with  whom  I  had  been  wont  to  discuss 
day  by  day  the  affairs  of  the  world.  And  although,  as  I 
have  told  in  a  previous  chapter,  the  measures  in  which  I 
had  taken  the  greatest  interest  had  during  the  last  four 
years  been  happily  accomplished  there  must  always  be 
useful  public  work  to  be  done  in  which  I  had  hoped  to 
take  my  share.  And  I  had  much  anxious  doubt  whether 
the  circumstances  in  which  my  connection  with  Plymouth 
had  ended  would  not  prevent  my  being  accepted  as  the 
Unionist  candidate  for  any  other  constituency.  I  could 
not  easily  reconcile  myself  to  the  idea  that  I  might  be  per- 
manently excluded  from  the  House  of  Commons.  But 
these  regrets  and  anxieties  were  overshadowed  by  a  more 
serious  anxiety  at  home.  In  April  1899  my  daughter 
had  been  married  to  a  young  officer  in  the  Northamptonshire 
Regiment.  Six  months  later  he  was  sent  out  with  his  regi- 
ment to  South  Africa.  They  were  going  out,  as  all  thought, 
on  a  very  short  errand.  It  might  be  that  the  war  would 
be  over  before  they  reached  the  Cape  ;  at  all  events  no  one 
doubted  that  by  Easter  they  would  be  back.  Two  years 

363 


364  OUT  OF  PARLIAMENT         [CHAP,  xxvm 

and  a  half  passed  before  the  husband  and  wife  saw  each 
other  again.  And  during  the  first  three  months  after  their 
parting  there  came  the  heavy  news  of  successive  defeats. 
Talana  Hill  and  Lombard's  Kop  in  October,  Stormberg, 
Magersfontein,  and  Colenso  in  the  black  week  of  December, 
and  Spion  Kop  a  month  later,  with  their  heavy  lists  of  killed 
and  wounded,  made  us  eager  to  see  the  newspapers,  yet 
almost  dread  to  read  them,  lest  there  should  be  some 
awful  news  for  the  brave  little  wife  who  had  come  back  to 
her  father's  home. 

After  I  left  the  House  I  took  no  further  part  in  political 
controversy.  I  retained  my  office  as  President  of  the 
Holborn  Conservative  Association  and  spoke  at  the  annual 
meetings,  but  with  that  exception  I  did  not  make  a  political 
speech  for  nearly  three  years.  But  it  was  not  long  before 
suggestions  were  made  to  me  as  to  my  return  to  the  House 
of  Commons.  In  the  letter  in  which  Sir  Michael  Hicks- 
Beach  answered  my  resignation  he  expressed  the  hope  that 
my  absence  from  the  House  would  be  only  temporary,  and 
in  June  Captain  Middleton,  the  chief  Conservative  agent, 
wrote  to  tell  me  that  our  friends  at  Portsmouth  were  very 
anxious  to  know  if  I  would  be  willing  to  accept  an  invita- 
tion to  contest  that  borough.  I  thought  it  curious  that  the 
first  suggestion  should  come  from  a  constituency  where  the 
naval  and  military  interests  which  had  been  hostile  to  me 
at  Plymouth  were  so  strong,  and  I  at  once  refused  the 
offer. 

A  month  or  two  later  the  resignation  of  Alderman  Sir 
Reginald  Hanson  caused  a  vacancy  in  the  City  of  London, 
and  my  name  was  at  once  mentioned.  But  Sir  John 
Puleston,  the  Conservative  chairman,  wrote  to  me  to  say 
that  it  was  considered  that  the  regular  practice  must  be 
followed  of  an  alderman  succeeding  an  alderman,  and  that 
the  war  feeling  in  the  City  was  too  strong  for  my  candi- 
dature to  be  put  forward  by  the  Association,  even  if  the 
other  objection  could  be  got  over.  The  understanding  that 
one  of  the  City  members  should  represent  the  bankers,  and 
one  the  Court  of  Aldermen,  had  prevented  Sir  Joseph 


1900-1905]  MORE  HOLIDAYS  365 

Dimsdale  from  being  brought  forward  in  1892,  and  he  was 
now  brought  forward  and  elected. 

The  passionate  war  feeling  of  September  1899  had  been 
somewhat  sobered ;  but  there  were  many  people  whose 
irritation  at  finding  how  long  and  difficult  was  the  task  of 
completely  subduing  the  Boers  made  them  the  more  bitter 
against  those  who  had  striven  to  prevent  the  war  or  to 
bring  it  to  an  early  close.  So  I  resigned  myself  to  what  I 
hoped  would  be  only  a  short  absence  from  the  House. 

This  absence  had  one  very  important  compensation.  For 
twenty  years  my  duty  to  my  constituents  and  political 
speeches  elsewhere  had  interfered  with  every  holiday. 
Every  Christmas  and  Easter  and  every  October  a  visit  had 
been  paid  to  Plymouth,  and  the  last  month  of  the  Long 
Vacation  had  always  been  given  up  to  political  work.  Now 
the  shorter  holidays  were  quite  free,  and  I  made  good  use 
of  them. 

In  1900  my  wife  and  I  spent  the  Easter  fortnight  at 
Rome,  and  saw  the  great  pilgrimages  and  services  of  the 
Jubilee  year.  The  following  year  we  went  to  the  Riviera 
at  Easter,  had  a  long  trip  to  Italy  in  the  autumn,  and  in 
December  paid  the  first  of  three  Christmas  visits  to  Egypt. 
In  1902  our  Easter  change  was  to  Algeciras,  in  the  autumn 
some  weeks  were  spent  at  Parame,  and  then  we  had  a 
delightful  month  in  Spain,  with  a  good  courier,  seeing  the 
beauties  of  St.  Sebastian  and  the  glories  of  Burgos,  and 
Cordova,  and  Granada,  and  Seville. 

It  was  a  great  gain  to  me  to  be  able  to  take  at  this  time 
these  untroubled  holidays.  For  it  seemed  as  if  every 
change  in  my  political  position,  whether  a  success  or  a 
reverse,  had  the  effect  of  increasing  the  pressure  of  my 
professional  work.  The  strain  of  work  during  this  latter 
year  was  very  severe,  and  in  December  I  had  something  of 
a  nervous  breakdown,  which  sent  me  off  to  Egypt  for  a  few 
weeks,  and  was  a  warning  I  did  not  disregard.  After  the 
end  of  1902  I  refused  a  great  many  briefs,  and  this  soon 
caused  a  rumour  to  get  about  that  I  intended  to  retire 
from  practice.  In  1904  this  impression  was  very  much 


366  OUT  OF  PARLIAMENT  [CHAP,  xxvm 

strengthened  by  the  fact  that  my  friends  at  the  Hardwicke 
Society  made  me  their  chief  guest  at  the  annual  dinner, 
and  formally  congratulated  me  on  completing  my  forty 
years  at  the  Bar.  That  was  the  most  expensive  dinner  I 
ever  attended.  Clients  became  convinced  that  I  was  about 
to  retire,  and  my  income  fell  off  more  rapidly  than  I  had 
expected  or  desired. 

This  did  not,  however,  trouble  me  much.  I  had  spent 
money  freely,  though  I  hope  not  unwisely,  I  had  made  a 
moderate  provision  for  my  children,  and  there  remained 
sufficient  for  the  comfort  of  the  closing  years  of  life,  even  if 
I  did  not  get  the  judicial  appointment  which  I  still  thought 
would  probably  be  offered  me. 

I  must  mention  one  fortunate  circumstance  which 
helped  me  in  my  time  of  heaviest  work.  In  1900  the  lease 
of  my  house  in  Russell  Square  expired.  We  did  not  take 
another  house  in  town,  but  contented  ourselves  with  our 
pretty  home  at  Staines,  and  only  occasionally  staying  in 
London,  either  at  one  of  the  hotels  or  in  a  flat  at  Whitehall 
Court.  This  was  a  great  gain  in  health  and  in  enjoyment. 

The  chief  incident  in  my  life  in  1903  was  a  very  pleasant 
trip  to  Canada  with  my  eldest  son.  Early  in  that  year  a 
well-known  tourist  agent  made  arrangements  for  a  parlia- 
mentary party  which  was  to  consist  of  members  of  the 
House  of  Lords  and  the  House  of  Commons,  and  was  to 
make  a  progress  through  Canada  from  Quebec  to  Victoria, 
being  received  and  entertained  by  the  principal  public 
bodies. 

Ex-members  of  the  House  of  Commons  were  invited  to 
join.  Lord  Lyveden  undertook  to  be  the  guide  and  con- 
ductor of  the  party.  The  scheme  promised  to  be  very 
successful.  Many  members  sent  in  their  names  as  desiring 
to  go,  and  a  very  generous  welcome  was  assured  to  them 
in  Canada. 

But  the  fair  prospects  of  the  undertaking  were  destroyed 
by  the  breaking  out  in  England  of  the  Tariff  Reform  con- 
troversy. On  May  I5th  at  Birmingham,  and  a  fortnight 
later  in  the  House  of  Commons,  Mr.  Chamberlain  had  set 


1900-1905]  MY  TRIP  TO  CANADA  367 

forth  in  definite  and  somewhat  imperative  terms  a  scheme 
of  Tariff  Reform  which  it  was  quite  evident  would  divide 
the  Unionist  party,  and  would  probably  break  up  the 
Government.  The  new  movement  was  soon  organised,  and 
in  July  the  Tarifi  Reform  League  held  its  first  meeting. 
It  seemed  so  likely  that  there  would  be  a  political  crisis 
before  many  weeks  had  passed  that  most  of  the  politicians 
who  had  intended  to  join  the  Canadian  trip  withdrew. 
The  reasons  which  detained  them  at  home  made  me  the 
more  anxious  to  go.  I  had  received  a  very  tempting  invi- 
tation to  stand  for  Brighton  ;  where  I  was  assured  that  an 
immediate  by-election  could  be  arranged  with  entire 
confidence  that  I  should  be  returned.  I  had  deferred  my 
answer  until  after  the  Canadian  trip,  and  was  anxious  to 
have  time  to  study  the  Colonial  aspects  of  the  fiscal  question, 
and  to  have  an  opportunity  of  discussing  it  with  the  leading 
statesmen  of  the  Dominion. 

When  on  August  20th  the  excursion  party  embarked  at 
Liverpool  we  were  only  twenty- three  in  number ;  and 
among  us  were  to  be  found  only  one  peer  besides  Lord 
Lyveden,  and  only  three  members  of  the  House  of  Commons  ; 
Mr.  Gumming  Macdona,  the  member  for  Bermondsey, 
Colonel  Sadler,  member  for  Middlesbrough,  and  Mr.  (after- 
wards Sir)  George  Doughty,  member  for  Grimsby,  and  I, 
were  the  only  persons  in  the  group  who  had  any  connection 
with  the  House.  It  would  clearly  be  absurd  to  attribute 
to  us  any  representative  character,  so  it  was  arranged  before 
we  arrived  at  the  St.  Lawrence  that  the  public  receptions 
and  dinners  should  be  abandoned,  and  the  parliamentary 
character  of  the  trip  should  be  quite  given  up.  We  were 
to  consider  ourselves  a  party  of  private  travellers,  who, 
however,  would  profit  by  the  special  arrangements  which 
had  been  very  kindly  promised  by  the  authorities  of  the 
Canadian  Pacific  Railway. 

This  scheme  was  not  entirely  carried  out,  for,  with  a 
tolerant  and  most  generous  hospitality,  the  mayors  and 
harbour  boards  insisted  on  showing  to  our  attenuated  and 
undistinguished  party  the  attentions  which  they  had  intended 


368  OUT   OF  PARLIAMENT  [CHAP,  xxvm 

to  pay  a  really  representative  body  of  English  parliamen- 
tarians, and  at  Montreal  we  were  entertained  at  a  delightful 
dinner  by  Lord  Strathcona. 

The  change  in  the  character  of  the  trip  was  a  great  ad- 
vantage to  me.  There  were  fewer  speeches  to  be  made,  and 
I  came  in  for  a  good  deal  of  personal  attention  from  the 
leaders  both  in  politics  and  law.  At  Montreal  I  was  enter- 
tained at  dinner  by  the  Quebec  Bar ;  Mr.  Donald  MacMaster, 
the  batonnier,  presided,  and  five  judges  and  about  thirty 
King's  Counsel  were  among  the  large  company  which  did  me 
honour. 

A  similar  dinner  was  given  at  Toronto  ;  and  there  a  great 
gathering  of  several  hundred  Freemasons  was  promptly 
arranged  to  salute  me  as  a  Past  Grand  Warden  of  the  Craft. 

At  Ottawa  I  met  the  politicians,  and  I  will  transcribe  a 
few  sentences  from  my  letter  to  Lady  Clarke  relating  my 
doings  there. 

When  we  were  at  Montreal  I  had  a  letter  from  Senator 
Casgrain  asking  Percival  and  myself  to  lunch  with  him  at 
the  Ottawa  Club  to  meet  Sir  Wilfrid  Laurier  and  Mr.  Fitz- 
patrick,  the  Minister  of  Justice,  so  as  soon  as  we  reached 
Ottawa  we  went  up  to  the  club  and  had  a  very  pleasant 
little  lunch.  Sir  Wilfrid  seemed  much  better  than  when 
I  saw  him  last  year  at  Jersey,  and  was  very  open  and  frank 
in  conversation. 

We  discussed  the  Canadian  questions,  and  from  him  and 
Fitzpatrick  I  obtained  some  very  useful  hints. 

After  lunch  the  senator  took  us  across  to  the  Senate  and 
there  introduced  us  to  some  of  the  principal  men,  and  the 
Speaker  gave  us  seats  on  the  Floor  close  by  his  chair  to 
listen  to  the  debate.  The  Senate,  however,  is  a  particularly 
bad  place  for  sound,  and  not  much  of  importance  was  going 
on.  It  was  otherwise  in  the  Lower  House.  There  we  were 
just  in  time  to  see  the  House  going  into  Committee  and 
beginning  a  long  sitting  which  lasted  from  that  day  until 
11.30  the  next  night. 

Mr.  Fitzpatrick  asked  us  to  dine  the  next  evening  at  the 
Rideau  Club,  and  the  Premier  promised  to  come. 

We  went,  and  had  a  most  interesting  dinner.  I  sat 
between  Sir  Wilfrid  Laurier  and  Mr.  Blair,  who  was  Minister 


1900-1905]  CANADIAN  STATESMEN  369 

for  Railways,  and  has  just  left  the  Government  because  of 
a  disagreement  as  to  the  cost  of  the  new  railway  line  which 
is  to  be  made  for  the  purpose  of  opening  out  the  district 
north  of  the  present  transcontinental  lines. 

Among  the  other  guests  were  Mr.  Fielding,  who  is  looked 
upon  as  the  probable  successor  of  Sir  Wilfrid  Laurier,  and 
Mr.  Monk,  the  Leader  of  the  Opposition,  besides  a  couple 
of  judges.  It  was  an  extremely  pleasant  party,  no  for- 
mality, no  speeches,  but  a  pleasant  interchange  of  opinions 
about  Canadian  and  imperial  politics,  and  when  the  party 
was  breaking  up  I  had  a  very  useful  talk  with  Mr.  Monk. 
Then  a  senator  was  left  to  keep  us  company  until  our 
train  started,  and  the  Ministers  went  over  to  resume  their 
places,  expecting  another  all-night  sitting.  As  a  matter 
of  fact,  an  agreement  was  come  to  about  11.30,  and  the 
weary  legislators  went  home  to  bed. 

We  went  on  to  Toronto,  and  I  quote  a  few  more  passages 
from  my  letters : 

On  Sunday  morning  we  went  to  St.  James's  Cathedral, 
the  finest  Anglican  Church  here,  and  a  very  spacious  and 
beautiful  building,  to  hear  Bishop  Du  Moulin  of  Niagara, 
who  used  to  be  preacher  at  this  church,  and  is  considered 
the  best  of  the  Canadian  preachers.  He  gave  us  a  very 
vigorous  discourse,  a  fine  piece  of  pulpit  declamation,  but 
not  very  Christian  in  tone.  The  early  part  of  the  sermon 
was  devoted  to  a  strong  denunciation  of  trades  unions 
and  of  women  who  earn  their  own  living.  The  latter  part 
had  not  much  to  do  with  the  text  or  introduction,  but  was 
very  finely  delivered. 

When  I  came  into  the  hotel  in  the  afternoon,  I  found 
a  card  from  Mr.  Goldwin  Smith,  so  we  went  to  his  house 
at  once  to  return  the  call.  He  recalled  meeting  me  at  a 
Fishmongers'  Hall  Dinner,  many  years  ago,  and  I  was  able 
to  remind  him  of  the  subject  of  our  conversation  then. 

Pic  lives  in  a  pleasant  English -looking  house,  the  oldest 
brick  building  in  Toronto,  with  spacious  lawns  in  front  and 
well-grown  trees.  Himself  is  a  fine  tall  old  man  of  just 
eighty  years  of  age,  very  vigorous  and  very  positive  and 
definite  in  his  ideas.  We  talked  for  an  hour  or  more — that 
is  to  say,  he  talked — and  I  kept  the  conversation  going  in 
the  direction  upon  which  I  wanted  to  hear  him. 


370  OUT  OF  PARLIAMENT         [CHAP,  xxvm 

For  many  years  he  has  proclaimed  his  belief  that  Canada 
and  the  United  States  are  destined  to  constitute  one  great 
republic,  and  he  holds  that  opinion  still ;  but  he  recognises 
that  the  strength  of  Canada,  by  the  increase  of  its  popula- 
tion and  by  the  great  transcontinental  railway,  has  made 
the  probability  of  a  Union  for  the  time  less  than  it  was. 

He  does  not  appear  to  approve  of  any  person  or  thing 
that  he  talks  of,  and  was  most  bitter  in  his  description  of  the 
Government,  and  administration,  and  people,  and  press,  of 
the  United  States. 

As  to  our  fiscal  question,  he  is  a  strenuous  opponent  of 
Mr.  Chamberlain,  as  much  I  think  from  a  dislike  to  the  man 
himself  as  from  any  careful  estimate  of  economical  consider- 
ations. He  admits  that  the  Canadian  people  are  at  present 
very  loyal,  giving  the  credit  for  the  friendship  felt  towards 
us  in  Lower  Canada  to  the  influence  of  Sir  Wilfrid  Laurier ; 
and  he  says  that  the  tariff  question  with  Germany,  of 
which  Mr.  Chamberlain  has  made  so  much,  has  been 
practically  unknown  or  at  least  unnoticed  by  the  Canadian 
people. 

Our  conversation  over,  he  showed  us  the  house,  especially 
the  library,  which  I  wanted  to  see,  and  in  which  to  my 
astonishment  I  found  a  billiard  table. 

The  next  morning  I  had  a  letter  from  him  asking  Percival 
to  dine  there  last  evening  if  he  were  not  going  to  dine 
with  the  Ministers  at  Parliament  House,  and  repeating  in 
characteristic  fashion  the  two  main  propositions  which  he 
desired  me  to  carry  away  from  his  monologue. 

However,  Percival  was  going  with  me  to  the  dinner  which, 
last  evening,  we  very  greatly  enjoyed. 

The  Premier  was  in  the  chair,  I  was  between  the  Chief 
Justice  and  Attorney-General,  who  is  here,  as  he  ought  to 
be  everywhere,  a  member  of  the  Cabinet,  and  next  but  one 
to  me  was  a  very  remarkable  man,  Colonel  Denison,  who  is 
the  intrepid  representative  here  of  Mr.  Chamberlain's  policy. 
We  had  a  number  of  speeches.  The  Premier  is  a  brilliant 
speaker,  and  gave  us  a  very  charming  address  and  \velcome. 
Four  speeches  followed  by  the  representatives  of  "  The 
Law,"  the  Chief  Justice,  "  Commerce  "  by  a  senator,  whose 
name  I  forget,  "Religious  Influences"  by  a  Canadian 
clergyman  there,  and  "  Banking  and  Trade  Affairs  "  by  a 
Mr.  Walker,  a  very  admirable  speaker,  whose  contribution 
to  the  evening  was  of  substantial  value. 


1900-1905]  BALFOURISM  371 

I  proposed  the  health  of  the  Premier,  and  I  believe  gave 
them  a  pretty  good  example  of  our  style. 

When  we  reached  Vancouver  we  heard  some  startling 
news  from  England.  There  had  been  notable  changes  in 
Mr.  Balfour' s  Cabinet.  On  September  i8th  he  had  accepted 
the  resignations  of  Mr.  Chamberlain,  the  leader  of  the  new 
Protectionists,  and  Lord  George  Hamilton  and  Mr.  Ritchie, 
the  staunchest  Free  Traders  among  his  colleagues.  The 
full  history  of  that  very  curious  incident  has  yet  to  be 
written ;  but  it  seems  clear  that  Mr.  Balfour,  who  had  avowed 
that  he  had  no  settled  convictions  on  the  fiscal  question, 
was  climbing  up  higher  on  the  fence,  and,  when  Mr.  Cham- 
berlain left  him,  dexterously  got  rid  of  the  colleagues  who 
were  most  strongly  pledged  to  definite  opinions  on  the 
other  side.  It  looked  for  a  few  days  as  if  the  Government 
must  break  up  and  an  immediate  General  Election  follow, 
and  Macdona,  Sadler,  and  Doughty  telegraphed  to  the 
Unionist  Whips  to  say  they  would  return  to  England  at 
once  if  they  were  wanted.  But  Mr.  Balfour  somehow 
managed  to  detain  the  Duke  of  Devonshire  in  the  Cabinet 
for  a  fortnight  longer.  An  immediate  dissolution  was 
avoided,  and  there  began  that  process  of  gradual  disintegra- 
tion which  in  little  more  than  two  years  brought  the  Unionist 
party  to  overwhelming  defeat. 

So  we  continued  our  journey  to  Victoria ;  and  on  our 
return  I  left  the  party  and  spent  a  few  days  in  New  York. 
I  wrote  to  Lady  Clarke : 

I  think  I  shall  accept  the  invitation  to  Brighton  without 
troubling  about  the  City.  There  are  two  considerations 
which  seem  to  me  to  tell  in  favour  of  Brighton.  One  is 
that  a  month  in  Brighton  would  be  more  pleasant  and  more 
wholesome  than  constant  City  dinners  ;  and  another  is 
that  a  City  member  has  no  opportunity  of  making  periodical 
speeches  to  his  constituents,  such  as  I  should  find  it  pleasant 
to  make  in  the  Brighton  Pavilion.  However,  we  will  talk 
about  that  when  I  get  back.  The  decision  must  then  soon 
be  made,  and  the  contest  will  really  begin  at  once. 


372  OUT  OF  PARLIAMENT         [CHAP,  xxvin 

When  I  returned  to  England  in  October  I  went  down  to 
Brighton  and  addressed  the  Committee  of  the  Conservative 
Association,  and  was  adopted  by  them  as  their  candidate 
at  what  I  expected  to  be  an  immediate  election.  But  Mr. 
Chamberlain  had  made  some  headway  there ;  while  I  was, 
as  I  had  been  from  my  first  entry  into  political  life,  a  firm 
opponent  of  any  proposals  to  put  taxes  on  food  or  on  raw 
materials.  If  the  understanding  on  which  I  had  come 
forward  had  been  adhered  to  and  a  sudden  election  had 
taken  place,  I  feel  sure  that  I  should  have  been  returned — 
indeed,  I  doubt  if  there  would  have  been  a  contest.  But 
some  of  the  retired  military  men,  who  are  an  influential  body 
at  Brighton,  had  not  forgiven  my  speeches  against  the  war ; 
some  of  the  traders  were  dissatisfied  because  I  would  not 
endorse  Mr.  Chamberlain's  proposals ;  and  the  Committee, 
under  the  masterful  chairmanship  of  Colonel  Verrall,  decided 
that  it  would  be  better  to  wait  until  the  General  Election. 
It  was  a  very  unwelcome  decision  to  me.  I  wanted  to  get 
back  into  the  House  of  Commons ;  and  if  I  had  abandoned 
the  candidature  at  Brighton  what  had  happened  there  would 
make  it  less  easy  to  find  a  promising  opening  elsewhere.  I 
felt  also  that  my  retirement  would  not  be  quite  fair  to  the 
constituency,  or  to  my  good  friend  Gerald  Loder,  who  had 
been  very  active  in  trying  to  secure  me  as  his  colleague.  So 
I  accepted  the  situation,  and  set  myself  to  the  troublesome 
and  very  expensive  work  of  making  myself  known  to  all 
classes  in  the  constituency.  In  the  late  autumn  of  1903, 
and  again  in  1904,  I  took  a  good  house  on  the  sea-front, 
and  we  had  our  carriages  and  horses  down,  and  entertained 
and  visited  very  freely.  I  should  have  gone  on  like  this 
until  the  General  Election,  spending  a  great  deal  of  money, 
and  feeling  painfully  the  difference  between  my  new 
surroundings  and  my  dear  old  friends  at  Plymouth,  when  I 
was  fortunately  rescued  by  a  quite  unexpected  incident. 

In  April  1905  Mr.  Loder  was  appointed  one  of  the  Unionist 
Whips,  and  had  to  come  down  for  re-election. 

Two  experts  in  electioneering  had  been  sent  down  to 
make  inquiries,  and  reported  that  the  seat  was  safe.     I  at 


1900-1905]  RELEASE  FROM  BRIGHTON  373 

once  suggested  that  the  other  seat  should  be  vacated,  and 
a  double  by-election  arranged.  But  this  would  have 
caused  delay.  So  Mr.  Loder  was  nominated,  and  Mr. 
Villiers,  a  son-in-law  of  Lord  Wimborne,  came  out  to  oppose 
him.  It  seemed  odd  to  have  Lady  Wimborne  and  her 
daughter  canvassing  against  us,  for  the  last  time  I  had  met 
them  I  was  canvassing  with  them  at  Plymouth  when  Mr. 
Ivor  Guest  was  standing  on  the  Conservative  side  in  1898. 

For  a  time  all  seemed  going  well,  but  as  the  polling  day 
drew  near  there  were  signs,  obscure  but  unmistakable,  that 
the  tide  was  turning  against  us.  The  fact  was  that  Mr. 
Loder  was  a  director  of  the  London,  Brighton,  and  South 
Coast  Railway,  and  just  then  there  was  a  difficulty  between 
the  directors  and  the  men  employed  in  the  engine  sheds. 
The  Liberals  made  the  most  they  could  of  the  trouble ;  and 
when  the  polling  took  place  it  made  a  difference  of  several 
hundred  votes,  and  Mr.  Loder  was  beaten  by  817. 

I  gladly  took  the  opportunity  of  releasing  myself  from 
an  uncongenial  position  ;  and  with  mutual  goodwill,  and 
I  think  mutual  relief,  the  constituency  and  I  parted. 

This  left  me  free ;  and  very  shortly  afterwards  a  way  was 
opened  for  renewing  negotiations  with  regard  to  the  seat 
for  the  City  of  London. 

It  did  not  now  seem  that  there  would  be  any  difficulty 
about  my  getting  back  to  the  House  of  Commons,  for  I 
soon  had  invitations  from  other  places.  Mile  End  and 
Southampton  were  proposed,  but  they  would  have  meant 
doubtful  contests ;  Hornsey  and  Shrewsbury  were  offered, 
and  they  were  safe  Conservative  seats.  But  my  prospect 
of  achieving  the  great  object  of  my  ambition  was  now  too 
promising  to  be  relinquished. 


CHAPTER    XXIX 

THE   CITY  OF  LONDON  !    1906 

I  HAD  many  friends  in  the  Court  of  Aldermen,  and  of  these 
the  two  who  interested  themselves  most  in  my  political 
career  were  Sir  David  Evans,  who  had  been  Lord  Mayor 
in  1892,  and  Sir  William  Treloar,  who  had  served  the 
Shrievalty  in  1899,  and  whose  turn  for  the  mayoralty  would 
come  in  November  1906.  It  was  understood  that  Sir 
Joseph  Dimsdale,  whose  mayoralty  in  the  year  of  King 
Edward's  Coronation  had  rivalled  in  splendour  those  of 
Sir  Reginald  Hanson  in  the  Victoria  Jubilee  year  of  1887, 
and  Sir  George  Faudel  Phillips  of  the  Diamond  Jubilee  of 
1897,  and  who  had  been  loaded  with  honours,  and  was  now 
Chamberlain  of  the  City,  was  inclined  to  withdraw  from 
parliamentary  work  ;  and  although  two  or  three  members 
of  the  Court  coveted  the  succession  there  was  not  a  majority 
in  that  body  for  any  one  of  them.  In  the  autumn  of  1905 
Lady  Clarke  and  I  went  for  a  trip  in  the  P.  &  O.  boat  Vectis 
to  the  Mediterranean,  and  among  our  fellow-passengers 
were  Sir  David  Evans  and  his  pretty  daughter.  He  and  I 
talked  much  about  politics,  and  he  proposed  that  my  name 
should  be  brought  before  the  Court  of  Aldermen,  so  that  if 
the  seat  was  not  wanted  for  one  of  themselves  they  might 
appear  to  retain  their  privilege  of  nomination  by  putting 
me  forward  as  their  candidate.  Directly  we  returned  to 
London  Sir  William  Treloar  came  into  consultation,  and 
took  up  the  scheme  with  characteristic  energy.  The 
Aldermen  were  sounded  separately,  and  while  the  two  or 
three  who  wanted  the  seat  themselves"  were  rather  lukewarm, 
each  promised  to  support  me  if  not  himself  selected.  Only 

374 


CANDIDATE  FOR  THE  CITY  375 

one  member  of  the  Court  was  definitely  hostile.  When  my 
two  friends  had  discussed  the  matter  confidentially  with 
every  member  separately,  and  knew  that  the  proposal  must 
succeed,  it  was  brought  before  the  Court  at  a  private 
meeting,  and  the  result  was  that,  with  the  one  single 
exception,  it  was  agreed  that  I  should  be  recognised  as  the 
official  candidate  of  the  Court  of  Aldermen. 

Meanwhile  I  had  been  in  communication  with  Sir  Joseph 
Dimsdale,  and  he  had  given  me  a  promise  that  he  would 
retire  whenever  the  General  Election  came,  and  would,  in 
announcing  his  resignation,  express  the  hope  that  I  would 
succeed  him.  Sir  John  Puleston,  the  Conservative  chair- 
man, had  been,  as  member  for  Devonport,  in  close  political 
association  with  me,  and  there  were  personal  reasons  which 
assured  me  of  at  least  his  ostensible  support.  With  Alban 
Gibbs  (afterwards  Lord  Aldenham)  I  was  in  pleasant  per- 
sonal relations,  and  I  knew  that  to  him  I  should  be  an 
acceptable  colleague. 

So  a  meeting  of  the  Executive  Committee  of  the  Con- 
servative Association  was  held.  I  addressed  it.  The  Com- 
mittee recommended  me  to  the  Association  ;  and  at  the 
meeting  of  the  whole  body  the  recommendation  was  received 
and  approved,  and  I  was  the  accepted  candidate  of  the 
party.  The  interval  between  this  adoption  and  the  actual 
election  did  not  pass  quite  smoothly.  Claude  Hay,  a  stock- 
broker or  jobber,  had  some  years  before  conceived  a  great 
dislike  to  me  because  I,  as  President  of  the  Holborn  Con- 
servative Association,  had  been  instrumental  in  preventing 
his  being  accepted  as  candidate  for  that  borough,  when 
Mr.  Gainsford  Bruce  was  raised  to  the  Judicial  Bench.  He 
joined  Mr.  Faithful  Begg  and  Mr.  Frederick  Ban  bury  in 
getting  up  an  application  to  Lord  Curzon,  who  had  just 
returned  from  India,  asking  him  to  come  forward  for  the 
City.  I  heard  of  it,  and  wrote  at  once  to  Lord  Curzon  telling 
him  that  whoever  came  forward  I  should  certainly  go  to 
the  poll,  and  I  received  a  prompt  and  very  friendly  reply 
saying  that  I  might  be  sure  that  he  would  never  stand  in 
the  way  of  my  return  to  the  House  of  Commons. 


376  THE  CITY  OF  LONDON         [CHAP,  xxix 

It  was  rumoured  that  an  attempt  would  be  made  to  induce 
the  Conservative  Association  to  rescind  their  resolution  in 
my  favour,  and  I  knew  that  the  thoroughgoing  supporters 
of  Mr.  Chamberlain  were  dissatisfied  with  my  opinions  on 
Tariff  Reform. 

We  promptly  took  precautions,  and  arranged  that  if 
necessary  a  separate  election  committee  should  be  formed, 
of  which  Sir  William  Treloar  would  be  chairman,  and  Sir 
David  Evans  vice-chairman. 

However,  the  trouble  passed  away ;  and  when  the  nomina- 
tions took  place  Mr.  Gibbs  and  I  were  the  only  candidates 
on  the  Unionist  side,  against  Sir  West  Ridgeway  and  Mr. 
Felix  Schuster,  who  stood  as  Liberals. 

There  were  several  nomination  papers  for  each  candidate. 
One  of  mine  was  signed  only  by  members  of  the  Bar,  not 
all  of  them  belonging  to  the  Unionist  party.  But  the 
most  remarkable  was  one  signed  by  nine  Aldermen  who 
had  served  the  office  of  Lord  Mayor.  We  had  a  short  but 
very  lively  contest.  I  took  rooms  at  De  Keyser's  Hotel  on 
the  Embankment  at  Blackfriars,  and  was  hard  at  work  all 
day  with  meetings  and  canvassing. 

One  early  morning  was  spent  at  the  Central  Meat  Market 
at  Smithfield,  and  another  among  the  fish  salesmen  at 
Billingsgate.  At  Lloyds,  at  the  Baltic,  at  the  Corn  Market 
in  Mincing  Lane,  and  in  Throgmorton  Street,  my  fellow-can- 
didate and  I  had  great  receptions  ;  and  at  the  City  Carlton 
Club,  of  which  I  had  been  a  member  for  thirty  years,  and 
nearly  the  whole  time  a  member  of  the  Committee,  my 
old  friends  gave  me  splendid  support. 

There  was  one  incident  of  the  contest  which  in  view  of 
what  happened  afterwards  I  think  it  well  to  recall.  On  the 
Tuesday  after  the  nomination  The  Times  contained  a  letter 
by  the  Duke  of  Devonshire  to  Mr.  Schuster,  in  which  he 
said  : 

I  have  no  hesitation  in  wishing  you  success  in  the  contest 
in  which  as  a  Free  Trader  you  are  engaged  against  the 
supporters  of  the  policy  of  the  Tariff  Reform  League. 


igo6]  A  GREAT   VICTORY  377 

I  saw  it,  and  I  resolved  that  there  should  be  no  misunder- 
standing as  to  my  opinions,  and  at  once  wrote  a  reply  for 
publication,  in  which  I  said  : 

You  say  I  am  a  supporter  of  the  policy  of  the  Tariff 
Reform  League.  That  is  not  the  fact.  I  am  not  a  member 
of  the  Tariff  Reform  League,  and  have  not  accepted  its 
programme.  ...  I  am  strongly  opposed  to  any  taxation  of 
food  or  raw  material  unless  absolutely  necessary  for  the 
purpose  of  raising  revenue. 

As  the  day  of  polling  drew  near,  the  enthusiasm  of  our 
friends  increased,  and  the  only  question  was  by  how  many 
thousands  of  votes  we  should  defeat  our  opponents.  I 
was  very  anxious  that  the  polling  should  be  fixed  for  the 
Saturday,  the  first  day  on  which  any  poll  could  take  place ; 
and  our  friends  bitterly  regretted  afterwards  that  they  did 
not  take  my  advice.  They  urged  that  the  voters  on  our 
side,  sure  of  success,  would  not  take  the  trouble  to  come 
to  town  on  a  Saturday,  and  so  our  majority  would  be  re- 
duced. I  said  that  the  figures  of  our  majority  did  not  so 
much  matter  ;  we  were  sure  of  winning  by  thousands,  and 
the  effect  of  a  victory  like  that  in  the  greatest  constituency 
in  the  kingdom  would  be  felt  everywhere.  The  City  of 
London  should  be  the  first  to  speak,  and  her  voice  might 
set  the  note  for  the  whole  country.  I  was  overruled,  and 
the  poll  was  fixed  for  Tuesday.  Saturday  night  brought 
the  news  of  Mr.  Balfour's  defeat  at  Manchester,  the  begin- 
ning of  the  Unionist  rout ;  and  in  the  disasters  that  followed 
our  triumph  in  the  City  of  London  was  little  heeded.  It 
was  indeed  a  notable  triumph.  When  the  numbers  were 
declared  on  Tuesday  night  they  stood  as  follows : 

Sir  Edward  Clarke  .  .  16,019 

Mr.  Alban  Gibbs     .  .  .  15,619 

Mr.  Felix  Schuster  .  .  .  5,313 

Sir  West  Ridgeway  .  .  5,064 

My  majority  over  the  highest  Liberal  was  10,706.  That 
was  the  crowning  day  of  my  political  career,  the  day 


378  THE  CITY   OF  LONDON          [CHAP,  xxix 

when  the  ambitious  hopes  which  had  been  with  me  for 
fifty  years  were  fulfilled,  and  more  splendidly  than  I  had 
ever  imagined  to  be  possible.  The  city  of  my  birth,  where 
I  had  begun  so  humbly  as  the  errand  boy  and  helper  in  my 
father's  little  shop,  the  greatest  constituency  in  the  world, 
greatest  in  the  combined  characteristics  of  numbers,  wealth, 
intelligence,  and  independence,  had  chosen  me  for  its  fore- 
most representative  in  Parliament.  And  it  had  chosen  me, 
not  by  the  mere  majority,  large  as  that  was,  of  the  votes 
cast  at  the  election.  My  sixteen  thousand  votes  repre- 
sented 57  per  cent,  of  the  possible  voters  at  a  City  election. 

Can  any  one  wonder  that  as  I  left  the  Guildhall  that 
night  the  highest  hopes  I  had  ever  formed  came  back  to  me 
more  strongly  than  ever  ?  At  last  my  course  seemed  clear. 
I  had  now  no  need  to  trouble  myself  about  professional 
work.  I  had  for  twenty  years  earned  a  very  large  income  ; 
and,  although  I  had  spent  very  freely,  I  had  saved  enough 
to  secure  to  me,  as  I  thought,  the  modest  income  which 
would  suffice  to  enable  me  to  devote  myself  to  a  political 
career.  It  was  true  that  I  was  sixty-five  years  of  age,  and 
that  it  was  evident  that  for  some  years  my  party  would 
be  out  of  office.  But  it  was  power  and  not  office  that 
attracted  me ;  and  a  wisely  led  opposition,  not  harassed  by 
small  responsibilities,  framing  policies  which  it  may,  at  any 
moment,  be  called  upon  to  put  in  practice,  may  render 
service  to  the  Empire  scarcely  less  important  than  those 
of  the  Ministry  itself. 

So  I  felt  very  happy  and  very  proud,  and  began  to  prepare 
myself  for  resuming  the  regular  attendance  at  the  House  of 
Commons  which  had  in  former  years  given  me  so  much 
enjoyment. 

On  February  I3th  Parliament  was  opened ;  and  my 
colleague  and  I,  in  assertion  of  the  traditional  privilege  of 
the  representatives  of  the  City  of  London,  took  our  seats 
upon  the  front  bench  on  the  Government  side  of  the  House. 
To  me  it  was  an  interesting  anniversary.  On  February  isth, 
1880,  Southwark  had  elected  me  its  member.  Thirteen 
years  passed ;  and  on  February  13th,  1893,  I  followed  Mr. 


1906]  A  NEW  COLLEAGUE  379 

Gladstone  in  debate  when  he  introduced  the  second  Home 
Rule  Bill.  Again  thirteen  years  passed ;  and  now  on 
February  I3th,  1906,  I  took  my  seat  as  the  senior  member 
for  the  greatest  constituency. 

Mr.  Balfour  was  not  a  member  of  the  House,  but  arrange- 
ments were  already  being  made  for  his  return  to  lead  the 
Unionist  party.  When  our  great  majority  in  the  City  was 
announced,  it  of  course  occurred  to  many  that  a  new  election 
in  the  City  might  enable  him  to  return  to  Parliament  in  a 
way  which  would  to  some  extent  atone  for  the  defeat  at 
Manchester. 

Alban  Gibbs  would  in  due  time  succeed  to  a  peerage  ; 
and  his  father's  age  rendered  it  not  improbable  that  this 
would  soon  take  place.  He  had  not  himself  been  prominent 
in  the  work  of  the  House  of  Commons,  and  was  not  supposed 
to  be  very  anxious  to  remain  there. 

On  the  morning  of  January  23rd  I  received  a  letter  from 
Balfour  asking  if  I  could  arrange  for  an  opportunity  to  be 
given  him  of  making  a  speech  in  the  City  before  the  opening 
of  Parliament.  And  the  same  post  brought  me  a  letter 
from  Lord  Salisbury  asking  if  I  would  be  willing  to  use  my 
influence  with  Alban  Gibbs  to  induce  him  to  vacate  his 
seat  in  order  to  let  Mr.  Balfour  take  it.  He  was  a  cousin 
of  Alban  Gibbs,  but  could  not  very  well  make  the  proposal 
direct  to  him,  as  at  a  recent  by-election  in  Hertford  he 
had  refused  to  support  Vicary  Gibbs,  who  had  lost  his  seat 
in  consequence.  I  promised  to  do  all  I  could,  and  suggested 
that  Akers-Douglas,  who  was  our  Chief  Whip  and  an  old 
personal  friend  of  Gibbs,  might  usefully  make  the  suggestion. 
This  answer  was  telephoned  to  Hatfield.  I  do  not  know 
if  it  was  found  necessary  for  Akers-Douglas  to  intervene, 
but  on  the  25th  Lord  Salisbury  wrote  to  tell  me  that  a 
very  satisfactory  letter  had  been  received  from  Gibbs,  and 
that  the  matter  was  arranged. 

Balfour  was  to  make  his  speech  at  the  dinner  to  Gibbs 
and  myself  at  the  Merchant-Taylors'  Hall  on  February  i2th  ; 
Alban  Gibbs  was  to  take  his  seat  in  the  House  on  the  I3th, 
and  then  immediately  apply  for  the  Chiltern  Hundreds, 


380  THE  CITY  OF  LONDON          [CHAP,  xxix 

and  the  new  election  in  the  City  was  to  take  place  as  soon 
as  possible. 

Just  before  the  Merchant-Taylors'  Hall  dinner  a  curious 
little  incident  occurred.  Sir  David  Evans  came  to  me, 
and  in  a  mysterious  way  said  that  he  had  been  asked  to 
suggest  to  me  that  it  would  be  well  if  I  did  not  speak  of 
Mr.  Balfour  as  my  leader,  and  indeed  did  not  mention  the 
leadership  of  the  party  at  all.  I  need  hardly  say  that 
the  effect  of  the  suggestion  was  that  I  did  very  definitely 
and  very  strongly  declare  my  allegiance  to  Mr.  Balfour. 

Mr.  Gibbs  promptly  vacated  the  seat,  and  I  went  round 
with  the  new  candidate  to  the  few  meetings  it  was  thought 
necessary  to  arrange.  I  spoke  at  those  meetings,  and  I 
issued  a  special  address  to  the  large  number  of  voters  in  the 
Temple  begging  for  their  renewed  support.  On  the  polling 
day,  February  27th,  Mr.  Balfour  was  unwell  and  could  not 
appear,  and  I  drove  about  with  Miss  Balfour  and  attended 
the  counting  of  the  votes,  and  afterwards  made  the 
speech  of  thanks  to  the  electors.  And  of  course  I 
walked  up  to  the  table  with  my  new  colleague  when  he 
took  his  seat. 

For  a  time  our  relations  were  most  cordial.  He  invited 
me  to  sit  on  the  front  bench,  a  privilege  to  which  I  was  not 
entitled,  as  I  had  not  been  a  member  of  the  late  Government ; 
and  it  was  at  his  request  that  on  March  7th  I  spoke  for  the 
Opposition  in  a  debate  upon  a  motion  for  the  payment  of 
members.  He  was  then  controlling  the  arrangements  for 
debate,  although  Mr.  Chamberlain  as  his  substitute  led  the 
party  in  the  House  until  Mr.  Balfour  took  his  seat  on 
March  I2th. 

Between  the  date  of  his  defeat  at  Manchester  and  his 
return  to  the  House  as  member  for  the  City  a  severe  struggle 
had  been  going  on  between  him  and  Mr.  Chamberlain  as 
to  the  position  which  the  Unionist  party  should  adopt  with 
respect  to  Tariff  Reform.  Of  the  157  Unionists  who  now 
had  to  face  a  majority  of  three  times  their  number  more 
than  two-thirds  were  ready  to  accept  the  entire  scheme  of 
the  Tariff  Reform  League,  and  unless  some  terms  of  agree- 


1906]  AN  ACCOMMODATION  381 

ment  could  be  found  it  was  clear  that  Mr.  Balfour's  leader- 
ship of  the  party  would  be  impossible. 

He  met  Mr.  Chamberlain  at  dinner  on  February  2nd,  but 
no  agreement  was  reached.  On  the  8th  Mr.  Chamberlain 
published  a  long  letter,  in  which  he  said  that  his  friends 
were  prepared  to  accept  Mr.  Balfour's  general  leadership, 
but  asked  for  a  declaration  that  Tariff  Reform  should  not 
be  dropped.  On  February  i2th,  at  the  dinner  given  to 
congratulate  Mr.  Gibbs  and  myself  on  our  election,  Mr. 
Balfour  said  that  the  general  tariff  and  the  question  of  a 
small  duty  on  food  were  questions  of  expediency  and  not 
of  principle.  He  did  not  admit  their  necessity,  or  reject 
them  as  in  all  cases  inadmissible.  The  next  day  a  prolonged 
conference  took  place.  Mr.  Balfour  and  Mr.  Gerald  Balfour 
and  Mr.  Chamberlain  and  Mr.  Austen  Chamberlain,  with 
the  assistance  of  Mr.  Akers-Douglas,  met  to  arrange  the 
terms  of  settlement.  The  afternoon  meeting  brought  no 
agreement,  and  the  negotiations  came  near  to  being  broken 
off ;  but  the  five  met  again  in  the  evening,  and  eventually 
a  formula  was  arrived  at.  The  next  morning  a  letter  from 
Mr.  Balfour  was  published  in  which  he  stated  that  Fiscal 
Reform  was  and  must  remain  the  first  constructive  work 
of  the  Unionist  party,  and  admitted  that  a  moderate 
general  tariff  and  a  small  duty  on  foreign  corn  were  not 
objectionable  in  principle.  Mr.  Chamberlain  replied  cor- 
dially accepting  the  surrender,  and  for  a  time  the  difficulty 
was  got  over. 

But  the  supporters  of  the  Government  were,  of  course, 
anxious  to  manifest  by  a  debate  and  a  division  the  com- 
pleteness of  their  triumph  in  the  constituencies  over  the 
Tariff  Reformers,  and  as  no  opposition  amendment  to  the 
Address  had  raised  the  fiscal  question  Sir  James  Kitson 
gave  notice  of  the  following  motion,  and  was  promised  a 
day  for  its  discussion — "  That  this  House,  recognising  that 
in  the  recent  General  Election  the  people  of  the  United 
Kingdom  have  demonstrated  their  uncompromising  fidelity 
to  the  principle  and  practice  of  Free  Trade,  deems  it  right 
to  record  its  determination  to  resist  any  proposals,  whether 


382  THE  CITY  OF  LONDON          [CHAP,  xxix 

by  way  of  taxation  upon  foreign  corn,  or  by  the  creation 
of  a  general  tariff  upon  foreign  goods,  to  create  in  this 
country  a  system  of  protection/' 

Notice  was  given  of  an  official  opposition  amendment  to 
this,  to  be  moved  by  Mr.  Stuart-Wortley,  to  omit  the  words 
from  "  recognising  "  to  "  Free  Trade,"  thus  making  the 
motion  only  a  declaration  of  intention  on  the  part  of  the 
present  House  of  Commons. 

As  the  day  drew  near  it  became  incumbent  on  those  who 
refused  to  support  Mr.  Chamberlain's  programme  to  consult 
as  to  their  action,  and  a  meeting  was  held  in  one  of  the 
committee-rooms,  at  which  Mr.  W.  F.  D.  Smith  presided 
over  a  gathering  of  about  forty  members.  It  was  an  inter- 
esting assembly.  The  son  of  the  former  leader  of  the  House 
of  Commons  was  in  the  chair,  and  with  him  were  Mr.  Hicks- 
Beach,  the  son  of  the  former  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer, 
and  Mr.  Lionel  Walrond,  the  son  of  the  late  chief  Conserva- 
tive Whip.  Sir  John  Kennaway,  Sir  Francis  Powell,  Mr. 
Percy  Thornton,  and  Mr.  Abel  Smith  were  four  of  the 
oldest  and  most  respected  members  of  the  House.  Sir 
William  Anson  and  Mr.  J.  G.  Talbot  represented  Oxford 
University,  and  Sir  Philip  Magnus  the  newer  University  of 
London.  The  Devonshire  influence  was  represented  by 
Mr.  Victor  Cavendish,  and  the  Salisbury  influence  by  Lord 
Robert  Cecil,  and  the  Durham  influence  by  Mr.  Lambton. 

Mr.  Rothschild  and  Sir  Edward  Sassoon,  Sir  Seymour 
King  and  Mr.  Mildmay,  coming  from  constituencies  of 
widely  differing  character,  were  all  opponents  of  the  new 
Protectionist  policy. 

More  than  one  meeting  took  place,  and  the  question 
of  concerted  action  was  fully  discussed.  Eventually  it 
was  decided  that  no  definite  pledges  should  be  given,  but 
that  the  course  recommended  was  to  vote  for  Mr.  Stuart- 
Wortley's  amendment,  and  if  that  were  defeated  and  Sir 
James  Kit  son's  resolution  became  the  main  question  to 
abstain  from  voting  in  either  lobby. 

On  March  I2th  Mr.  Balfour  took  his  seat  as  member  for 
the  City  of  London,  and  Sir  James  Kitson's  motion  having 


1906]  A  PITIFUL  PERFORMANCE  383 

been  moved  and  seconded,  he  rose  to  make  his  first  speech 
as  Unionist  leader  in  the  new  Parliament.  It  was  a  pitiful 
performance.  Instead  of  discussing  the  large  questions 
raised  by  the  resolution,  he  described  it  as  a  vote  of  censure 
on  the  Opposition,  and  then  proceeded  to  criticise  its  terms, 
and  put  five  interrogatories  to  the  Government,  one  being 
whether  the  Indian  tariff  was  or  was  not  Protectionist, 
and  another  being  why  the  words  "  or  otherwise  "  were  in 
the  resolution  when  first  put  on  the  paper  and  were  not  in 
the  resolution  as  moved.  As  he  went  on  refining,  and 
distinguishing,  and  inquiring,  the  cheers  on  his  own  side 
gradually  grew  fainter,  and  when  he  sat  down  no  Minister 
lose  to  reply.  A  little  later  Mr.  Chamberlain,  with  well- 
simulated  indignation,  attacked  the  Government  for  making 
no  answer  to  the  questions  asked,  and  then  dexterously 
deprived  himself  of  the  opportunity  of  dealing  with  main 
issues  by  moving,  what  he  of  course  knew  would  be  nega- 
tived, the  adjournment  of  the  debate.  The  design  was 
to  secure  a  division  in  which  no  Unionist  would  have  any 
excuse  for  abstention,  and  this  result  was  obtained  when  the 
division  was  taken  on  Mr.  Stuart- Wortley's  amendment. 

That  small  advantage  was  dearly  purchased,  for  it  had 
given  the  Prime  Minister  the  opportunity  of  administering 
to  Mr.  Balfour,  amid  the  delighted  cheers  of  his  followers, 
a  well -deserved  castigation.  Sir  Henry  Campbell-Banner- 
man's  closing  sentences  are  worth  preserving. 

He  says  that  we  are  to  stop  the  proceedings  in  this  debate, 
and  his  amendments  are  not  to  be  moved  until  we  have 
answered  these  terrible  questions.  In  so  far  as  I  have 
referred  to  them,  I  may  have  answered  them  incidentally. 
I  have  no  direct  answer  to  give  to  them.  They  are  utterly 
futile,  nonsensical,  and  misleading.  They  were  invented 
by  the  right  hon.  gentleman  for  the  purpose  of  occupying 
time  in  this  debate.  I  say,  enough  of  this  foolery.  It 
might  have  answered  very  well  in  the  last  Parliament,  but 
it  is  altogether  out  of  place  in  this  Parliament.  The  tone 
and  temper  of  this  Parliament  will  not  permit  it.  Move 
your  amendments  and  let  us  get  to  business. 


384  THE  CITY  OF  LONDON         [CHAP,  xxix 

The  motion  to  adjourn  was  rejected  by  405  to  115.  When 
the  debate  was  resumed  at  the  evening  sitting  (for  at  that 
time  the  House  used  to  adjourn  from  half-past  seven  to 
nine),  I  told  Mr.  Balfour  that  I  wished  to  speak  in  the  course 
of  the  debate  in  order  to  maintain  in  the  House  the  opinions 
I  had  expressed  outside,  and  that  as  they  did  not  accord 
with  the  policy  now  accepted  by  him  and  Mr.  Chamberlain 
I  thought  I  had  better  not  come  to  the  official  box,  but 
speak  from  a  place  further  along  the  bench  and  near  the 
Speaker's  chair.  That  proposal  he  at  once  negatived,  and 
said  he  wished  me  to  speak  from  the  usual  place.  Then  he 
asked  when  I  would  like  to  speak.  I  told  him  I  was  quite 
indifferent  as  to  this,  and  would  suit  his  convenience. 

"  Then,"  said  he,  "  as  Lloyd  George  is  to  speak  at  ten 
o'clock  and  the  House  will  sit  late,  do  you  mind  following 
him?" 

"  Perhaps,"  he  added,  "  as  I  am  rather  tired,  you  will 
not  mind  my  not  staying  to  hear  you."  This  arranged,  I 
saw  Mr.  Chamberlain,  and  had  ten  minutes'  conversation 
with  him  in  the  corridor.  He  was  quite  friendly.  I  told 
him  the  sort  of  speech  I  was  going  to  make,  and  he  made 
no  remark,  as  I  expected  he  would,  with  regard  to  such 
a  speech  being  delivered  from  our  front  bench.  He  also 
was  away  from  the  House  when  I  spoke.  About  eleven 
o'clock  I  rose  to  make  my  speech.  It  was  listened  to 
respectfully  on  our  side,  and  of  course  more  sympathetically 
by  our  opponents.  I  trust  that  many  of  those  who  read 
this  book  will  take  the  trouble  also  to  read  the  speech, 
which  is  reprinted  in  my  Selected  Speeches.  But  for  others 
I  wish  to  quote  here  the  closing  passages.  I  did  not  know 
what  would  happen,  but  I  think  I  had  a  premonition  that 
it  would  be  my  last  speech  in  the  House  of  Commons.  I 
quoted  the  declaration  of  Mr.  Disraeli  and  Lord  Derby  in 
1852,  and  then  I  said  : 

These  are  not  obsolete  shibboleths  or  discredited  declara- 
tions. They  are  the  declarations  of  the  leaders  of  the 
Tory  party  which  have  been  acted  upon  during  the  past 


igo6]         THE  CREED  OF  THE  TORY  PARTY  385 

half-century  by  the  leaders  of  the  party.  For  fifty  years 
they  have  represented  the  unquestioned  creed  of  the  Tory 
party.  Through  the  thirty  years  of  Mr.  Disraeli's  leader- 
ship in  our  councils,  through  the  fifteen  years  of  Lord 
Salisbury,  through  the  ten  years  of  my  right  hon.  friend, 
they  have  been  the  creed  of  our  party,  and  I  stand  firm  to 
that  creed  to-day.  The  cry  of  the  big  and  the  little  loaf 
had  almost  died  out  in  the  country.  It  had  for  years 
been  scarcely  heard,  except  in  some  country  constituency 
where  probably  the  name  of  the  candidate  revived  old 
antagonisms.  Now  that  ill-omened  spectre  has  been 
summoned  from  its  grave,  and  I  believe  that  a  generation 
may  pass  before  it  will  be  laid  to  rest  again.  At  any  rate, 
there  are  some  of  us  who  will  stand  firm  in  the  creed  which 
has  for  so  long  been  the  creed  of  the  Tory  party,  and  will 
resist  now,  and  at  any  time,  any  proposal  to  put  a  tax 
on  the  corn  or  meat  of  the  people,  unless,  indeed,  in  cir- 
cumstances of  so  terrible  a  national  necessity  that  we  are 
compelled  to  sacrifices  of  the  bitterest  and  deepest  kind. 
But  as  a  matter  of  administration  and  taxation,  there  are 
a  good  many  of  us  who  will  never  be  parties  to  its  intro- 
duction into  our  financial  system.  I  hope — it  is  almost 
hoping  against  hope,  but  I  do  still  hope — there  may  be  found 
amongst  those  who  have  served  in  the  ranks  of  the  Tory 
party  for  many  years  past  many  who  respect  the  decision 
that  has  been  come  to  by  their  greatest  leaders,  and  are 
prepared  to  stand  by  the  policy  which  seemed  to  them  good 
for  the  country.  I  do  hope  that  the  Tory  party  will  regain 
its  influence,  for  I  believe  its  principles  are  an  important 
and  even  essential  part  of  our  national  life.  And  I  trust 
our  leaders  will  recognise  that  when  we  are  anxious  to  extend 
the  area  of  our  trade  and  gain  for  ourselves  imperial  renown, 
we  must  never  forget  that  the  first  duty  of  a  statesman  is 
to  the  poorest  of  the  people,  and  that  to  every  statesman 
worthy  of  the  name  the  welfare  of  the  people  is  the  highest 
law.1 

The  course  of  events  on  the  I3th  was  curious,  and  I  think 
it  must  have  been  arranged.  A  division  was  taken  on  Stuart- 
Wortley's  proposal  to  omit  certain  words.  The  numbers 
were  445  to  118.  Then  another  amendment  was  proposed ; 

*  Selected  Speeches,  p.  26. 


386  THE  CITY  OF  LONDON          [CHAP,  xxix 

but  as  soon  as  the  mover  sat  down,  and  before  it  had  been 
put  from  the  chair,  Campbell-Banner  man  moved  "  that  the 
question  be  now  put."  Against  the  closure  all  Unionists 
could  vote,  and  the  numbers  were  471  to  123.  Sir  J .  Kitson's 
motion  was  then  put  from  the  chair. 

I  was  sitting  on  the  front  bench  next  to  Sir  Alexander 
Acland-Hood,  who  told  me  he  was  not  going  to  tell  against 
the  motion.  The  bells  were  ringing  for  the  division,  and  he 
had  scarcely  told  me  this  when  Austen  Chamberlain,  looking 
very  angry,  came  from  his  place  to  Acland-Hood  and  said, 
"  What  is  this  I  hear,  that  you  are  not  going  to  tell  ?  " 
"  No,"  said  Acland-Hood,  "  we  are  not  going  to — Forster  and 
I  must  stand  by  what  we  told  our  constituents."  "  Well," 
said  Austen  Chamberlain,  "  I  do  not  see  how  you  can  expect 
us  to  come  down  night  after  night  and  give  you  respectable 
divisions,  if  we  are  to  be  treated  like  this.  Where's  Arthur  ?  " 
"  In  his  room."  "  Is  not  he  going  to  vote  ?  "  "I  don't 
know."  Austen  Chamberlain  hurried  off  to  find  him,  and 
before  the  question  was  put  the  second  time  came  back 
smiling,  and  said  triumphantly  to  Acland-Hood,  "  You  are 
to  tell.  He  says  he  wishes  it."  "  Well,"  said  I  to  Acland- 
Hood,  "  what  are  you  going  to  do  ?  "  "  Oh,"  said  he,  "  he 
is  my  leader,  and  if  he  tells  me  to  do  it  I  must,  but  ten  minutes 
ago. I  believed  he  was  not  going  to  vote  himself."  This 
choice  of  Whips  determined  a  substantial  number  of  votes. 
Akers-Douglas  came  in.  Said  I,  "  What  will  you  do  ?  " 
"  Oh,  I  cannot  desert  my  leader." 

Of  those  who  had  been  present  at  Mr.  W.  F.  D.  Smith's 
meeting  in  the  committee-room  the  large  majority,  and  I 
among  them,  refrained  from  voting.  Six  stalwart  Unionist 
Free  Traders  voted  with  the  Government.  They  were  Mr. 
Percy  Thornton,  Lord  Robert  Cecil,  Sir  Seymour  King, 
Mr.  Lambton,  Mr.  Walter  Rothschild,  and  Mr.  Gibson 
Bowles. 

Nield  and  others  fell  into  line,  but  25  of  those  who  had 
voted  in  the  former  division  now  abstained  or  voted  for 
the  motion,  and  only  98  went  into  the  Opposition  Lobby, 
while  the  majority  numbered  474. 


1906]  MY   HEALTH   FAILS  387 

Directly  the  division  lists  came  out  the  Tariff  Reformers, 
furious  at  the  bad  division,  set  out  to  drive  me  from  Parlia- 
ment. The  men  who  had  previously  tried  and  failed  to 
prevent  my  selection  for  the  City  now  joined  in  the  outcry 
against  me.  Some  of  my  friends  stood  firm.  Sir  William 
Treloar,  who  was  the  next  alderman  in  rotation  for  the 
Lord  Mayoralty  of  the  City  of  London,  wrote  letters  to  The 
Times  in  my  defence,  and  when  he  was  attacked  for  it  in 
the  Court  of  Aldermen  he  said  he  would  resign  his  gown 
rather  than  give  up  his  right  to  defend  a  friend  who  was 
being  maligned.  But  Sir  David  Evans,  who  had  undertaken 
to  be  one  of  the  vice-chairmen  of  my  committee  if  the  Tariff 
Reform  League  prevented  my  selection  by  the  Conservative 
Association,  took  a  different  line.  Others  whom  I  had 
believed  to  be  my  friends  fell  away,  especially  Sir  John 
Puleston,  and  greatly  through  his  action  a  resolution  was 
passed  calling  upon  me  to  explain  my  conduct.  At  this 
moment  my  health  suddenly  gave  way,  and  for  a  week  or 
two  1  was  lying  ill  at  Thorncote.  Sir  Douglas  Powell  was 
called  in,  and  he  promptly  ordered  a  six  months'  voyage, 
and  entire  abstinence  from  political  work  or  study  of  any 
kind.  I  would  not  consent  to  the  six  months,  but  at  the 
end  of  March,  as  soon  as  I  was  able  to  leave  my  room,  I 
went  off  with  Lady  Clarke  and  my  son  William  to  Cairo. 
It  was  not  a  very  fortunate  trip.  I  soon  became  stronger  ; 
but  we  had  an  exceptionally  stormy  voyage  out.  When  I 
got  to  Cairo  I  found  the  homeward  stream  had  begun,  and, 
unless  I  left  quickly,  we  should  have  a  difficulty  in  securing 
a  comfortable  passage  (while  I  was  eager  to  get  back), 
and  breaking  our  journey  at  Algeciras,  where  we  meant  to 
stay  a  few  days,  Lady  Clarke  was  attacked  with  severe 
tonsilitis,  and  we  were  kept  there  a  fortnight. 

When  I  got  back  in  May  I  found  the  situation  had  not 
improved.  So  far  indeed  as  the  City  was  concerned  I  was 
not  seriously  uneasy.  I  have  no  doubt  that  the  meeting 
which  I  had  promised  to  address  would  have  been  a  very 
stormy  one,  but  I  have  equally  no  doubt  that  I  should  have 
held  my  own  ;  and  of  course  I  should  not  have  accepted 


388  THE  CITY  OF  LONDON         [CHAP,  xxix 

from  the  majority  of  a  meeting  of  an  association  of  a  few 
hundred  persons  my  dismissal  from  a  position  which  had 
been  given  me  by  over  16,000  electors. 

And  an  incident  which  greatly  disturbed  my  opponents 
showed  how  little  they  represented  the  general  feeling  in 
the  City.  A  meeting  was  announced  to  be  held  at  the 
Cannon  Street  Hotel  against  the  Government  Education 
Bill.  Sir  John  Puleston  was  to  take  the  chair  and  Mr. 
Balfour  was  announced  to  speak.  No  request  to  do  so  had 
been  sent  to  me,  nor  any  invitation  to  the  meeting  itself. 
But  at  the  time  appointed  I  presented  myself  at  the 
hall,  went  to  the  committee-room,  and  was  then  asked  to 
second  the  resolution  which  Mr.  Balfour  was  to  move.  I 
had  an  excellent  reception,  and  was  cheered  by  the  crowd 
as  I  left  the  hotel. 

But  at  that  meeting  Mr.  Balfour's  behaviour  to  me  was 
very  cold  and  unfriendly.  He  did  not  shake  hands  with 
me ;  indeed,  he  had  not  done  so  since  my  return  from  Cairo. 
If  he  had  desired  to  retain  me  as  a  colleague,  a  word 
from  him  would  have  stopped  all  trouble  in  the  City.  But 
he  not  only  refused  (as  I  have  since  learned)  to  interfere 
in  the  matter,  but  he  declined  to  express  an  opinion  when 
appealed  to  by  the  City  people,  and  his  silence  was  under- 
stood, as  I  have  no  doubt  he  meant  it  to  be  understood, 
as  showing  a  desire  to  get  rid  of  me  from  the  House  of 
Commons.  When  I  came  to  know  this,  the  situation  of 
course  was  entirely  changed. 

I  should  have  been  quite  content  to  remain  in  Parlia- 
ment and  to  work  with  all  my  strength  for  the  Unionist 
cause.  The  fact  that  the  fight  would  be  a  hard  one,  that 
it  would  involve  the  sacrifice  of  a  leisure  I  had  greatly 
enjoyed,  and  that  I  should  be  spending  the  later  years  of 
life  in  striving  to  secure  for  my  party  a  triumph  which  I 
certainly  should  be  too  old  to  share,  would  not  have  de- 
terred me  from  throwing  myself  into  the  conflict  if  I  had 
still  been  accepted  by  my  leader  as  one  of  his  trusted 
lieutenants.  But  it  seemed  clear  to  me  that  if  I  remained 
in  the  House  I  must  change  my  seat.  I  could  not  submit 


1906]  I    RESIGN   MY  SEAT  389 

to  have  my  presence  on  the  front  bench,  to  which  Mr. 
Balfour  had  himself  invited  me,  now  simply  tolerated  by 
an  unfriendly  leader  ;  and  my  hope  of  rendering  real  service 
to  the  Tory  cause  was  obviously  at  an  end.  At  the  same 
time  my  health  was  by  no  means  satisfactory.  For  the 
first  time  in  my  life  I  suffered  from  want  of  sleep,  and 
Sir  Douglas  Powell  and  Dr.  Ferrier  both  told  me  that  1 
must  give  up  either  my  profession  or  my  political  work, 
as  to  continue  both  would  involve  the  risk  of  complete 
breakdown,  either  physical  or  mental.  Sir  Douglas  Powell 
told  me  this  by  letter  on  May  28th,  and  two  days  later  the 
opinion  was  confirmed  by  Dr.  Ferrier  in  the  strongest  terms. 
I  came  to  an  immediate  decision.  I  wrote  to  Balfour  the 
following  letter,  and  took  it  down  to  the  House  of  Commons. 


HOUSE  OF  COMMONS, 

May  30th,  igo6l 

DEAR  BALFOUR, 

I  think  that  as  my  colleague  and  my  leader  you 
ought  to  have  the  first  intimation  of  my  intention  to  apply 
for  the  Chiltern  Hundreds. 

I  am  acting  under  the  strongest  medical  advice,  so  I 
need  not  say  anything  as  to  other  reasons  which  you  might 
or  might  not  think  sufficient. 

If  I  could  ignore  the  question  of  health,  I  should  certainly 
not  consider  them  adequate  to  justify  so  serious  a  step. 
But  I  have  no  right  to  ignore  that  question,  and  it  compels 
me  to  this  decision. 

Yours  very  faithfully, 

EDWARD  CLARKE. 


Then  I  went  to  the  Whips'  room  and  saw  Sir  Alexander 
Acland-Hood  and  Mr.  J.  S.  Sandars,  and  told  them  my 
resolve,  at  the  same  time  giving  Sir  Alexander  my  letter 
to  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  asking  for  the  Chiltern 
Hundreds,  signed  but  not  dated,  and  authorised  him  to 
send  it  on  as  soon  as  he  found  it  convenient,  promising 
to  say  nothing  of  my  decision  until  I  saw  in  the  papers  the 
announcement  of  the  vacancy. 
26 


390  THE  CITY  OF  LONDON         [CHAP,  xxix 

Then  I  went  off  at  once  to  Jersey  to  spend  a  few  quiet 
days  with  my  daughter  and  grandchildren. 
I  received  the  following  telegram : 

WEST  STRAND,  8.52  p.m.,   May  30^,   1906. 

This  is  only  to  say  I  have  received  your  letter.  Am 
just  leaving  for  Versailles,  from  where  I  will  write  to  you. 
— BALFOUR. 

The  promised  letter  was  never  written.  I  think  my  old 
leader  might  have  shown  a  little  more  courtesy  to  one  who 
had  been  his  friend  for  more  than  a  quarter  of  a  century, 
and  had  just  taken  no  small  part  in  obtaining  for  him  the 
seat  for  the  City  of  London  ;  but  he  was  then  in  great 
difficulties  himself  in  presence  of  the  masterful  and  threat- 
ening companionship  of  Mr.  Chamberlain,  and  of  course 
he  could  not  foresee  how  soon  he  would  be  relieved  from 
that  formidable  rival. 


CHAPTER   XXX 

A   MEDITATION  I     IQ06 

(Written  in  bed,  in  Shorthand) 

THORNCOTE,  STAINES, 
March  1906. 

SIR  RICHARD,  of  the  grave  kind  eyes  and  quiet  thoughtful 
voice,  has  just  closed  the  door  and  left  me  with  the  assur- 
ance that  there  is  really  nothing  wrong,  only  extreme 
fatigue,  and  that  I  have  only  to  rest  myself  well  again. 
News  and  correspondence  are  of  course  forbidden,  and  I 
am  to  keep  my  mind  as  clear  as  possible  of  the  worries 
of  politics  and  law.  Well,  I  think  I  can  obey  the  instruc- 
tions ;  and  rest,  simple,  untroubled,  seems  to  me  the 
pleasantest  of  prescriptions.  So  I  lie  back  and  close  my 
eyes,  and  think  I  will  obey.  Alas,  it  is  not  quite  easy. 
Thought  will  not  stop  where  I  put  it,  and  whatever  subject 
I  choose  to  start  with,  it  seems  that  all  roads  lead  to  the 
same  end.  I  start  by  thinking  of  my  very  early  boyhood, 
just  before  I  went  to  a  country  school.  And  in  a  flash, 
memory  has  run  down  the  long  chain  of  incident :  school, 
prizes,  evening  classes,  examinations,  studentship,  call  to 
the  Bar,  taking  silk,  all  the  rest  of  it :  and  there  I  am  at 
the  House  of  Commons  of  last  week.  This  will  never  do, 
I  will  try  again.  This  time  I  will  think  of  a  case  full  of 
romance,  tried  long  years  ago,  and  almost  all  forgotten. 
But  I  have  scarcely  brought  the  scene  to  my  memory 
when  the  scene-shifters  are  busy  at  work,  and  here  am  I 
before  Mr.  Justice  Farwell,  cross-examining  Sir  Alexander 
Binnie  as  I  was  last  Saturday,  about  the  effect  of  fatigue  in 
metal  so  that  a  very  small  jar  will  bring  the  breaking 
strain.  I  did  not  expect  when  I  was  asking  the  questions 
(though  the  thought  did  cross  my  mind)  that  there  was 

391 


A  MEDITATION  [CHAP,  xxx 

some  fatigue  of  metal  about  me,  and  that  I  should  not  be 
able  to  finish  the  case.  No,  this  will  never  do.  I  have 
not  energy  enough  to  make  a  fresh  start,  so  I  open  my 
eyes  to  see  if  I  shall  find  distraction  for  my  thoughts  in 
all  my  pleasant  surroundings,  in  the  prettiest  room  I  ever 
saw.  That  is  just  what  this  bedroom  is.  It  is  late  March 
afternoon,  fine  and  bright,  and  as  I  lie  I  can  see  through 
the  window  the  silver  stream,  flashing  like  a  sheet  of 
diamonds,  on  its  way  to  Penton  Hook  :  and  beyond  it  a 
tender  brown  haze  with  just  a  faint  tint  of  green  softens 
the  outline  of  St.  Anne's  Hill.  On  the  table  beside  me 
bowls  of  fresh  violets  surround  a  tall  cluster  of  noble  daffodils, 
and  the  air  is  filled  with  the  scents  of  spring.  Then  the 
room  itself.  The  cool  soft  afternoon  light  is  round  me 
like  a  flood.  It  lights  up  the  rich  crimson  of  the  walls, 
the  pale  olive  green  of  the  curtains,  repeated  in  the  eider- 
down quilt  at  my  feet  and  the  curtains  at  my  head,  which 
are  lined  with  a  pale  pink,  which  is  again  echoed  in  the 
shades  of  the  electric  lamps.  And  in  this  harmony  of 
colour  the  white  enamel  of  the  furniture — wardrobe,  over- 
mantel, and  the  rest — takes  its  natural  part.  There  is  no 
need  now  to  force  the  direction  of  my  thoughts.  This 
room  has  been  in  the  making  for  fifteen  years,  and  there 
is  scarcely  a  picture  or  an  ornament  in  it  which  does  not 
carry  my  memory  off  to  some  pleasant  incident  of  the  past. 
Let  me  delight  in  the  treasures  for  a  time,  treasures  all, 
for  the  happy  days  which  they  recall,  though  some  are  of 
very  trifling  value  measured  in  terms  of  money.  There 
on  my  right  hand  hangs  "  The  Mother's  Picture/'  which 
should  be  found  in  some  form  of  engraving  or  of  colour 
in  the  chief  bedroom  of  every  home  which  God  has  blessed 
with  children.  How  little  did  the  young  Raphael  know, 
when  a  lovely  face  before  him  and  a  barrel-top  at  hand 
led  him  to  pour  out  his  genius  in  these  forms,  that  he  was 
giving  to  the  world  a  message  which  centuries  could  not 
silence !  I  never  look  at  that  engraving  now  without 
recalling  the  words  of  the  poor  woman  who  saw  it  for  the 
first  time  at  the  Bethnal  Green  Museum — "  Ah,  she  could 


1906]  PICTURES  393 

not  help  being  a  good  woman  with  a  baby  like  that."  There 
on  the  left  of  the  overmantel  (I  shall  come  back  to  this 
overmantel  presently)  is  a  brilliant  proof  of  an  Assumption 
by  Murillo.  I  say  an  Assumption,  for  I  cannot  at  the 
moment  recall  which  of  his  great  pictures  it  is.  I  think 
it  is  one  of  those  two  which  hang  nearly  together  on  the 
right-hand  wall  as  you  go  up  the  long  gallery  at  Madrid. 
It  is  the  perfection  of  beauty  in  light  a,nd  shade.  As  I 
lie  here  I  cannot  see  the  outline  with  any  distinctness,  but 
I  see  the  glory  of  the  light  on  the  face  of  the  Madonna, 
and  the  luminous  haze  of  angel  faces  round  her.  There  is 
nothing  finer  of  Murillo,  I  should  think  in  the  world,  except 
that  altar-piece  of  St.  Antony  of  Padua  which  lines  the 
wall  of  the  south-east  chapel  at  the  Cathedral  of  Seville, 
and  which,  if  you  see  it  just  at  the  right  hour  of  the  morning, 
blazes  upon  you  with  more  than  the  glory  of  an  Assumption, 
for  the  centre  of  the  light  is  not  the  blue-robed  Madonna, 
but  the  celestial  Child  Himself.  Further  to  the  left,  on 
the  wall  beyond  the  window,  hangs  a  copy  of  the  best 
engraving  of  the  greatest  picture  in  the  whole  world.  It 
is  Mendel's  engraving  of  the  "  Sistine  Madonna."  Here 
Raphael  was  at  his  greatest.  And  he  who  has  not  made  a 
pilgrimage  to  Dresden,  and  sat  silent  for  one  half-hour 
before  this  picture,  does  not  know  how  painting  can  excite 
and  delight  the  soul.  Until  Mendel  engraved  it  the  true 
picture  was  hardly  known  to  those  who  could  not  make 
this  pilgrimage.  Other  engravers  (you  will  see  it  in  a 
moment  when  you  set  their  works  by  the  side  of  this)  give 
but  a  poor  rendering  of  the  face,  especially  of  the  eyes  of 
the  Infant  Christ.  This  is  our  chief est  treasure.  Mendel's 
plate,  which  cost  him  seven  years  of  labour,  and  brought 
him  £6,000  in  payment,  was  only  just  finished  when  the 
artist  died.  Twenty  copies  were  printed  from  the  copper 
while  the  engraving  was  still  unfinished,  for  three  of  the 
curtain  rings  had  been  omitted.  Forty  more  with  the  rings 
inserted,  but  only  in  outline.  Then  two  hundred  more,  of 
which  this  is  one,  and  then  an  electrotype  was  taken  and 
the  plate  cut  across. 


394  A  MEDITATION  [CHAP,  xxx 

Except  for  some  emblems  and  photographs  not  to  be 
written  about  here,  these  are  the  only  frames  before  my 
eyes.  Stay,  there  is  another,  Sharpe's  engraving  of  Carlo 
Dolce' s  "  Virgin  and  Child  "  :  a  present  to  my  Lady  from 
our  old  friend  Dr.  Ginsburg,  pleasantest  of  companions, 
who  used  to  travel  up  to  town  with  me  of  a  morning  and 
make  the  whole  day  brighter  by  the  half-hour's  talk.  But 
enough  of  pictures,  though  there  are  one  or  two  more  I 
should  like  to  dwell  on.  I  turn  to  the  white  overmantel 
with  its  columns  and  recesses  and  shelves,  where  in  the 
centre,  and  matching  the  whiteness  of  the  arch  above  her, 
stands  a  parian  statuette  of  the  finest  work  of  modern 
sculpture,  the  Gibson  Venus,  the  special  glory  of  the  Great 
Exhibition,  which  ushered  in  the  golden  decade  of  the 
nineteenth  century  ;  but  stay,  I  think  I  am  wrong.  I  am 
not  sure,  but  I  think  that  Hiram  Power's  "  Greek  Slave" 
was  the  great  statue  of  1851,  and  the  "  Venus "  came 
to  delight  us  in  1862. 

Scattered  around  her  among  vases  and  ivories  are  the 
trifling  souvenirs  of  many  days  of  travel,  and  these  little 
things  will  amuse  me  most  just  now.  Close  by  the  white 
"  Venus  "  are  two  gaily  coloured  figures  which  I  bought 
in  Chinatown  at  Vancouver,  at  the  quaint  little  shop  next 
to  the  chief  joss-house,  and  the  sight  of  these  carries  my 
mind  away  to  the  Chinese  waiters  at  the  hotel  at  Laggan, 
and  so  to  the  lake  in  the  clouds,  and  a  whole  gallery  of 
delightful  pictures  which  my  memory  brought  back  from 
the  journey  through  the  great  Dominion.  Just  below 
stand  a  group  of  tiny  Spanish  bull-fighters  and  dancers, 
and  as  I  look  I  am  away  at  the  walls  of  the  Alhambra  in 
the  flood  of  glory  of  a  late  September  afternoon. 

Opposite  the  little  shops  that  nestle  in  a  corner  outside 
the  walls  the  old  king  of  the  gipsies  poses  for  the  inevitable 
snapshot,  while  the  guide  tells  stories  of  his  terribly  wicked 
past. 

On  a  lower  shelf  are  climbing  monkeys  and  a  wide- 
mouthed  frog  of  very  common  clay,  which  were  bought 
from  the  market  boat  which  attacks  the  P.  &  O.  steamer 


1906]  MEMORIES  395 

as  she  comes  to  her  moorings  at  Gibraltar.  I  hope  that 
in  ten  days'  time  I  shall  see  that  boat  again.  And  behind 
them  are  two  of  the  cheap  ikons,  unframed  pictures  on 
wood,  which  recall  St.  Isaac,  the  Kazan,  and  the  noble 
pile  of  St.  Sophia.  I  cannot  remember  at  which  these  were 
bought,  but  I  know  as  my  Lady  and  I  were  standing  at 
the  long  counter  inside  St.  Sophia  where  the  candles  and 
ikons  and  books  are  sold,  there  came  along  two  poor  dirty 
labouring  men  with  the  unsmiling  face  of  the  Russian 
peasant,  who  looked  so  longingly  at  the  little  pictures  they 
were  too  poor  to  buy  that  my  Lady  picked  up  two  of  the 
ikons  (quite  simple  pictures,  costing  only  some  ten  or  twenty 
kopecks  each),  had  them  wrapped  in  paper,  and  gave  them 
to  the  men.  They  did  not  smile,  I  doubt  if  they  could,  but 
their  look  of  gratitude  as  they  crept  away  with  their 
treasures  has  been  a  pleasure  to  us  for  seven  years.  There 
are  other  trifles  recalling  other  scenes — the  model  of  the 
Savoyard,  for  instance,  the  great  bell  of  the  newest  (except 
the  new  cathedral  at  Berlin)  and  one  of  the  most  interesting 
of  the  great  churches  of  Christian  Europe.  But  I  have 
seen  enough,  and  though  I  do  not  go  to  sleep  I  close  my 
eyes  and  a  dreamy  panorama  seems  to  pass  before  me. 

The  soldiers  as  they  swagger  down  the  Nevsky  Prospekt ; 
the  orange-sellers  chattering  round  the  gate  of  the  Alcazar  ; 
the  lumber  rafts  rushing  down  the  chute  at  Ottawa  ;  the 
students  swaying  over  the  Koran  at  the  University  Mosque 
at  Cairo  ;  the  sun  on  the  Rose  Garden  of  the  Dolomites ; 
the  lizard  shooting  over  blinding  white  walls  of  Pompeii ; 
all  pass  before  my  eyes,  and  I  think  I  hear  the  warning 
shout  as  the  gondola  comes  swinging  round  the  sharp  corner 
of  the  Grand  Canal. 

I  lie  in  quiet  contentment ;  very  weak,  but  thankful  for 
this  luxury  of  beauty  and  pleasant  memories,  full  of  grati- 
tude for  all  the  earthly  blessings  which  have  been  showered 
upon  me.  The  best  of  all  is  close  at  hand. 

The  door  is  gently  opened  and  a  sweet  voice  says,  "  Well, 
dearest,  do  I  seem  to  have  been  a  long  time  away  ?  " 


CHAPTER    XXXI 

FROM  LABOUR  TO   REFRESHMENT:    1906-1914 

THE  circumstances  attending  my  election  for  the  City  of 
London  and  my  subsequent  resignation  had  tried  me  a 
good  deal,  and  I  think  I  should  at  once  have  left  England 
for  a  prolonged  absence,  if  it  had  not  been  for  some  special 
duties  which  fell  upon  me  in  this  busy  year.  It  was  my 
year  of  office  as  Treasurer  of  Lincoln's  Inn.  In  the  ordinary 
course  of  succession  by  seniority  Lord  Alverstone  would 
have  served  the  office  in  1904,  and  I  in  1905.  But  in  the 
former  year  the  Prince  of  Wales  (now  our  gracious  Sovereign) 
honoured  the  Inn  by  accepting  the  Treasurership,  and  with 
great  courtesy  and  dignity  discharged  its  duties.  These 
now  required  me  to  be  as  constantly  as  I  could  in  attendance 
at  the  Inn.  But  there  was  another  set  of  duties  which  had 
for  two  years  made  very  large  demands  on  my  time  and 
thought,  and  which  were  now  approaching  their  com- 
pletion. These  were  connected  with  the  Royal  Commission 
on  Ecclesiastical  Discipline  which  was  appointed  in  April 
1904  "  to  inquire  into  the  alleged  prevalence  of  breaches 
or  neglect  of  the  law  relating  to  the  conduct  of  Divine 
Service  in  the  Church  of  England  and  to  the  ornaments 
and  fittings  of  churches,  and  to  consider  the  existing  powers 
and  procedure  applicable  to  such  irregularities  and  to  make 
such  recommendations  as  may  be  deemed  requisite  for 
dealing  with  these  matters."  It  will  be  convenient  that 
I  should  here  deal  with  some  fullness  with  that  which  is 
an  essential  part  of  the  story  of  my  life,  but  has  not  been 
referred  to  in  earlier  chapters.  I  had  for  many  years 
been  strongly  interested  and  constantly  active  in  the 

396 


1906-14]  CENTRAL  CHURCHMANSHIP  397 

discussion  of  church  questions.  My  earliest  political 
speeches  were  made  in  resistance  to  the  disestablishment 
and  disendowment  of  the  Church  in  Ireland ;  I  was  one 
of  the  original  members  of  the  council  of  the  Church  Defence 
Institution,  which  had  very  important  influence  in  political 
affairs  during  the  later  decades  of  the  last  century,  and  I 
frequently  spoke  at  large  public  meetings  upon  the  subject 
of  religious  education.  I  was  always  a  strong  churchman ; 
but  I  never  allied  myself  with  either  of  the  two  extreme 
parties  in  the  Church  itself.  As  I  said  in  November  1903 
in  a  speech  I  made  at  the  Pavilion,  Bright  on, '^at  the  begin- 
ning of  my  candidature  for  that  borough  : 

I  am  a  churchman,  and  I  decline  to  accept  any  adjective 
in  front  of  that  word  "  churchman  "  which  would  limit  me 
or  describe  me  as  belonging  to  any  one  party  in  the  Church, 
but  the  Church  I  'belong  to  is  a  Protestant  Church.  His- 
torically, constitutionally,  and  doctrinally,  the  Church  of 
England  is  a  Protestant  Church.  Its  Protestantism  is  the 
only  explanation,  and  the  only  justification,  of  its  now  being 
severed  from  the  body  of  the  Western  Church,  and  I  am 
very  anxious  that  the  law  of  our  Church  shall  be  capable 
of  enforcement. 

It  has  been  my  experience,  and  one  not  unusual  with 
men  who  desire  to  stand  firm  by  central  principles,  that  I 
have  been  attacked  alternately  by  both  the  extreme  parties. 

I  do  not  know  how  I  had  given  offence  to  the  English 
Church  Union  at  the  time  I  was  standing  for  Southwark 
in  1880,  but  the  secretary  of  that  body  has  claimed  to  have 
been  instrumental  in  procuring  my  defeat  at  the  second 
election  there.  In  1884  my  speech  and  vote  in  support 
of  the  Bill  for  permitting  marriage  with  a  deceased  wife's 
sister,  in  spite  of  a  warning  addressed  to  me  by  my  High- 
Church  constituents,  turned  some  of  my  supporters  into 
opponents  whose  influence  was  felt  in  the  troubles  which 
occurred  there  fifteen  years  later.  The  next  attack  came 
from  the  other  side.  There  was  a  little  Orange  Society  at 
Plymouth,  and  when  I  built  St.  Peter's  Church,  and  set 


398         FROM  LABOUR  TO   REFRESHMENT  [CHAP,  xxxi 

on  the  front  of  the  tower,  according  to  old  and  goodly 
custom,  the  figures  carved  in  stone  of  St.  Peter,  St.  Andrew, 
and  St.  John,  they  passed  a  resolution  accusing  me  of 
having  set  up  a  mass-house  on  the  banks  of  the  Thames, 
adorned  with  graven  images.  That  was  easily  dealt  with. 
I  invited  them  to  send  their  representatives  to  inspect  the 
church,  and  promised  that  if  they  found  anything  that 
was  illegal  either  in  the  structure  or  the  services  I  would 
pay  the  expenses  of  the  deputation.  I  think  they  made 
inquiries  in  London,  and  I  heard  nothing  more  of  them. 

In  1899  the  increase  of  illegal  practices  in  certain 
dioceses,  and  especially  in  the  diocese  of  London,  led  to 
drastic  proposals  in  the  House  of  Commons  which  in  default 
of  any  action  by  the  Bishops  I  declared  my  intention  to 
support.  Then  came  memorable  debates  in  both  Houses. 
In  February  of  that  year  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 
(Temple),  whose  reputation  for  straightforwardness  and 
firmness  gave  his  words  great  influence  on  the  public  mind, 
made  a  declaration  in  the  House  of  Lords  in  the  name  of 
the  whole  of  the  episcopal  body. 

He  said : 

Although  we  are  all  quite  determined  that  we  shall 
bring  the  ritual  of  the  Church  of  England  within  its  proper 
lawful  limits,  we  appeal  to  the  laity  generally  to  give  us 
time  to  go  into  the  matter,  and  not  to  expect  that,  because 
there  has  been  this  agitation,  in  the  course  of  two  or  three 
months  the  whole  thing  will  be  altogether  changed.  We 
cannot  do  it  in  the  time. 

Two  months  later  a  debate  took  place  in  the  House  of 
Commons,  and  a  resolution  intended  to  assist  in  the  work 
of  correction  was  passed  without  a  division — "  That  this 
House  deplores  the  spirit  of  lawlessness  shown  by  certain 
members  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  confidently  hopes 
that  the  Ministers  of  the  Crown  will  not  recommend  any 
clergyman  for  ecclesiastical  preferment  unless  they  are 
satisfied  that  he  will  loyally  obey  the  Bishops  and  the  Prayer 
Book,  and  the  law  as  declared  by  the  courts  which  have  juris- 
diction in  matters  ecclesiastical." 


1906-14]       TWO  IMPORTANT   RESOLUTIONS  399 

When  the  motion  was  put  to  the  House,  Mr.  Balfour, 
under  pressure  from  a  little  group  of  High- Churchmen, 
wished  to  omit  the  last  fourteen  words.  I  and  others 
protested,  and  he  gave  way.  They  were  retained  in  the 
resolution  by  200  to  14 ;  I  being  one  of  the  tellers  for  the 
majority. 

I  believe  that  for  some  years  this  resolution  was  acted 
upon,  and  an  undertaking  of  obedience  to  the  law  was 
required  from  a  cleric  before  he  was  appointed  to  a  Crown 
living.  I  have  much  doubt  whether  in  some  more  recent 
years  this  important  and  mandatory  resolution  passed 
unanimously  by  the  House  of  Commons,  and  accepted  and 
supported  by  the  Government  of  the  day,  has  not  been 
wholly  ignored. 

A  month  later  the  Church  Discipline  Bill  came  before 
the  House,  and  the  Government  only  prevented  its  being 
read  a  second  time  by  an  amendment  proposed  by  the 
Attorney-General,  Sir  Richard  Webster  (afterwards  Lord 
Alver stone),  declaring 

That  this  House,  while  not  prepared  to  accept  a  measure 
which  creates  fresh  offences  and  ignores  the  authority  of 
the  Bishops  in  maintaining  the  discipline  of  the  Church, 
is  of  opinion  that,  if  the  efforts  now  being  made  by  the 
Archbishops  and  Bishops  to  secure  the  due  obedience  of 
the  clergy  are  not  speedily  effectual,  further  legislation 
will  be  required  to  maintain  the  observance  of  the  existing 
laws  of  Church  and  State. 

The  years  passed  on ;  a  new  Archbishop  promised 
"  stern  and  drastic  action  "  ;  nothing  was  done ;  and  then 
in  1904  the  Royal  Commission  was  appointed. 

On  October  nth,  1899,  in  the  very  midst  of  my  troubles 
at  Plymouth,  I  spoke  at  the  Albert  Hall  to  the  largest 
meeting  I  have  ever  addressed.  It  was  the  mass  meeting 
of  men  of  the  Church  Congress.  My  topic  was  "  The 
Church  and  its  Work."  I  felt  that  it  was  an  exceptional 
opportunity,  and  I  gave  more  time  and  thought  to  the 
consideration  of  what  I  should  say  than  I  ever  gave  to  any 


400        FROM   LABOUR  TO   REFRESHMENT   [CHAP,  xxxi 

other  speech.    I  made  my  appeal  for  a  revival  within  the 
Church. 

We  have  heard  a  great  deal — I  think  too  much — of 
the  Catholic  revival.  Is  it  not  time  that  there  was  some- 
thing said  of  a  Christian  revival,  a  revival  that  would 
awaken  us  to  a  sense  of  our  duty,  our  influence,  and  our 
capacity,  and  help  us  to  make  the  Church  of  England  to 
which  we  belong  a  more  potent  factor  in  all  the  moral  and 
social  movements  that  affect  our  country  ?  l 

These  words  did  not  help  me  in  my  difficulties  at 
Plymouth  ;  I  knew  they  would  offend  many  people  there ; 
but  I  felt  it  was  my  duty  to  say  them. 

I  have  quoted  the  words  in  which  at  the  outset  of  my 
candidature  for  Brighton  I  defined  my  position  upon  church 
questions.  It  seemed  curious  that  after  that  declaration 
it  was  from  the  extreme  Low-Church  party  that  opposition 
came. 

An  elector  in  the  constituency,  representing  the  Church 
Association,  wrote  to  ask  me  to  pledge  myself  to  vote  for  a 
Bill  for  the  inspection  of  nunneries.  I  refused  to  give  any 
such  promise.  Thereupon  the  Church  Association  issued 
a  pamphlet  attacking  me  for  having  as  patron  allowed  an 
exchange  of  livings  which  brought  to  St.  Peter's  a  vicar  who 
in  the  church  of  his  former  parish  had  worn  the  illegal 
vestments ;  and  they  circulated  this  pamphlet  throughout 
the  constituency.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  I  had  refused  to 
permit  the  exchange  until  the  incoming  vicar  had  given 
me  in  writing  his  undertaking,  which  he  faithfully  observed 
during  the  eleven  years  of  his  incumbency  at  Staines,  that 
he  would  loyally  obey  the  law  in  all  the  services  of  the  church. 

I  may  as  well  mention  here  that  at  the  election  for  the 
City  of  London  in  1906  the  last  circular  which  the  electors 
received  was  a  similar  attack  upon  me  by  the  Church 
Association,  which  was  posted  to  them  at  much  expense 
on  the  day  before  the  polling,  and  of  course  had  no  effect  at 
all  in  a  constituency  which  knew  me  so  well. 

1  Selected  Speeches,  p.  298;  Public  Speeches,  1890-1900,  p.  296, 


1906-14]  A   ROYAL  COMMISSION  401 

In  May  1904  the  Royal  Commission  was  appointed,  and 
Mr.  Balfour  invited  me  to  serve  upon  it. 

It  was  unquestionably  a  strong  commission,  and  fairly 
represented  the  different  sections  of  the  Church;  and  it 
addressed  itself  with  great  diligence  to  its  appointed  task. 
There  were  118  sittings,  it  examined  164  witnesses,  and 
sent  out  inquiries  which  brought  very  full  information. 
I  was  a  regular  attendant  at  the  meetings,  and  willingly 
(for  I  was  then  very  hopeful  that  some  good  would  come 
of  our  labours)  sacrificed  a  great  deal  of  professional  work 
and  income. 

We  had  a  misfortune  in  the  death  of  Lord  St.  Helier  at 
the  end  of  1904.  It  was  not  only  that  he  was  a  great 
ecclesiastical  lawyer,  but  he  had  for  years  been  desirous  of 
providing  a  remedy  for  the  disorders  into  which  we  were 
commissioned  to  inquire.  Seven  years  earlier  he  had 
suggested  to  me  the  passing  of  an  Act  of  two  clauses,  one 
doing  away  with  the  Bishop's  power  of  veto,  and  substitut- 
ing a  judicial  veto  on  vexatious  proceedings  or  the  require- 
ment of  leave  from  the  Court  for  their  institution,  and  the 
other  substituting  deprivation  for  imprisonment  as  the 
penalty  for  contumacious  disobedience.  (Both  these  re- 
forms were  recommended  in  our  Report.)  His  place  was 
filled  by  the  appointment  of  Lord  Alver stone,  who  was 
less  experienced  and  less  interested  in  the  subject. 

The  Report  of  the  commission  had  been  drafted  before 
my  illness  in  March  1906,  but  it  was  still  under  consideration 
when  I  came  back  to  England,  and  I  was  present  at  the 
final  meetings.  The  fact  that  it  was  unanimous  was  chiefly 
owing  to  the  skill  of  Bishop  Paget  of  Oxford  in  framing 
sentences  which  different  opinions  found  themselves  able 
to  accept ;  but  upon  the  main  questions  referred  to  the 
commission  there  was  no  difference  of  opinion  at  all. 

The  law  was  clear  and  unquestionable.  The  statement 
of  it  in  the  Report  was  drawn  up  by  Sir  Lewis  Dibdin, 
Lord  Alverstone,  and  myself,  and  its  correctness  has  never 
been  disputed.  It  was  equally  clear  that  the  breaches  of 
the  law  into  whose  prevalence  we  were  commissioned  to 


402         FROM   LABOUR  TO   REFRESHMENT  [CHAP,  xxxi 

inquire  were  widespread  and  increasing,  although  we 
were  able  to  close  our  report  with  the  statement  that 

in  the  large  majority  of  parishes  the  work  of  the  Church  is 
being  quietly  and  diligently  performed  by  clergy  who  are 
entirely  loyal  to  the  principles  of  the  English  Reformation 
as  expressed  in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer. 

It  was  with  much  satisfaction  that  I  signed  the  Report, 
for  while  it  contained  some  suggestions  as  to  legislation 
and  the  constitution  of  new  courts  which  I  did  not  think 
very  practical,  or  at  all  likely  to  be  carried  into  effect,  it 
did  very  clearly  point  out  the  illegalities  which  were  being 
committed ;  and  its  first  recommendation  was  that  certain 
practices  specified  in  the  Report  which  were  "  plainly 
significant  of  teaching  repugnant  to  the  doctrine  of  the 
Church  of  England  and  certainly  illegal,  should  be  promptly 
made  to  cease  by  the  exercise  of  the  authority  belonging 
to  the  Bishops,  and,  if  necessary,  by  proceedings  in  the 
Ecclesiastical  Courts."  And  it  justified  the  acceptance  of 
evidence  from  persons  who  had  been  employed  to  observe 
and  describe  the  services  complained  of  in  a  very  weighty 
sentence  : 

We  must  also  add  that  it  does  not  follow  that  irregu- 
larities in  the  services  in  a  church  should  be  passed  over 
because  no  habitual  worshippers  complain.  Not  only  have 
all  the  parishioners  a  right  to  complain  who  might  possibly 
attend  if  those  services  were  differently  conducted,  but 
also  the  nation  has  a  right  to  expect  that  in  the  national 
Church  the  services  shall  be  conducted  according  to  law. 

It  was  a  great  disappointment  to  me  that  the  time  and 
labour  spent  on  this  commission  were  wasted.  Indeed  it 
would  have  been  better  if  the  commission  had  never  been 
appointed,  for,  like  so  many  other  Royal  Commissions,  it 
was  an  instrument  of  delay,  and  those  whose  firm  enforce- 
ment of  its  unanimous  recommendations  would  have  done 
much  to  cure  the  evils  it  was  appointed  to  investigate  found 
in  its  report  a  pretext  for  inaction.  When  this  became 


1906-14]  A  TRIP  TO  SOUTH  AFRICA  403 

clear  in  the  year  1910  I  wrote  some  letters  to  The  Times 
upon  the  subject,  and  became  President  of  the  National 
Church  League,  hoping  through  that  society,  and,  with 
the  aid  of  the  Laymen's  Committee  soon  afterwards  estab- 
lished, to  do  something  to  check  the  spread  of  the  illegal 
practices  which,  with  the  tolerance  of  the  Archbishops, 
and  even  the  encouragement  of  some  of  the  Bishops,  are 
gradually  effecting  the  disintegration  of  the  Church  of 
England,  and  gravely  endangering  her  privilege  of  estab- 
lishment and  her  enjoyment  of  her  great  endowments. 

The  Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  was  signed  on 
June  2ist,  and  a  few  weeks  later  I  went  off  with  my  son-in- 
law,  Captain  Norman  Rees-Webbe,  for  a  trip  to  South 
Africa.  I  could  not  have  found  a  better  companion,  for 
he  had  served  in  the  war  for  two  years  and  a  half ;  with 
his  regiment,  the  Northamptons,  during  the  fighting  advance 
to  Modder  River ;  and  afterwards  with  the  Army  Service 
Corps  in  convoying  supplies  in  many  parts  of  our 
fields  of  operation.  We  were  away  about  two  months, 
and  every  day  of  our  stay  in  the  Colony  was  full  of  interest. 
Landing  at  Cape  Town,  we  were  for  a  few  days  the  guests 
of  Dr.  Jameson,  then  Premier  of  Cape  Colony,  at  Groot 
Schoor,  and  he  asked  some  of  his  principal  colleagues  to 
come  and  meet  us  at  dinner.  Travelling  on  to  Kimberley, 
we  saw  the  battle-fields  of  Graspan,  and  Belmont,  and 
Magersfontein,  and  Modder  River.  At  Kimberley  we  saw 
the  diamond  floors  and  the  great  Siege  Alley,  and  went  down 
to  the  lowest  level  of  the  Kimberley  Mine,  and  were  at  the 
midday  explosions  at  the  Wesselton  Pit,  and  visited  the 
largest  of  the  native  compounds.  At  Johannesburg  Mr. 
Lionel  Phillips  himself  was  our  guide  in  the  deep  levels  of 
Robinson  Deep  ;  and  here  the  members  of  the  local  Bar 
entertained  me  to  dinner  at  the  Rand  Club,  J .  L.  Leonard 
being  in  the  chair. 

At  Pretoria,  where  we  stayed  at  the  hotel  which  was  the 
headquarters  of  General  French  during  the  later  stages  of 
the  war,  I  was  again  entertained  by  the  Bar ;  and  here  my 
health  was  proposed  by  a  young  barrister,  who  had  been 


404        FROM   LABOUR  TO  REFRESHMENT  [CHAP,  xxxi 

a  pupil  of  one  of  my  juniors  in  the  Jameson  case,  and  had 
greatly  distinguished  himself  as  a  fighter  on  the  Boer  side 
in  the  war.  He  has  since  obtained  an  even  wider  fame  as 
General  Smuts. 

On  our  way  down  to  Durban  we  stayed  at  Ladysmith, 
and  paid  a  very  interesting  visit  to  the  battle-field  of  Colenso. 
Here  is  surely  the  strangest  monument  ever  set  up  by 
British  hands.  It  marks  the  spot  where,  through  some 
unexplained  accident  or  incapacity,  the  Boers  were  allowed 
to  capture  and  carry  off  ten  British  guns. 

A  short  stay  at  Ladysmith  and  another  at  Pietermaritz- 
burg,  and  then  at  Durban  we  took  ship  for  home. 

Our  time  on  shore  was  too  busy  for  me  to  write  anything 
except  a  series  of  letters  to  my  wife,  giving  an  account  of 
our  doings,  but  I  made  up  for  this  by  a  good  deal  of  indus- 
trious writing  on  board  ship. 

In  the  volume  which  I  had  bound  for  her  and  lettered 
Trip  to  South  Africa:  August  nth  to  October  i^th,  there 
are  about  two  hundred  and  fifty  quarto  pages  of  manu- 
script. Fifty-five  of  them  are  my  letters  to  her ;  twice 
that  number  contain  the  first  draft  of  the  early  chapters 
of  this  book.  During  our  time  at  sea  I  read  every  evening 
some  chapters  of  the  Pentateuch,  and  made  careful  notes, 
and  these  notes,  copied  out  the  following  morning,  fill 
fifty-seven  pages.  Then  there  are  about  a  dozen  pages  of 
scraps,  and  quotations,  and  comments  upon  books.  It 
was  a  pretty  good  output  for  a  few  weeks  ;  and  the  discip- 
line of  forcing  the  mind  to  activity  upon  subjects  as  far 
removed  as  possible  from  the  troubles  of  the  early  part  of 
the  year  was  very  useful.  I  came  home  with  my  physical 
health  and  mental  energy  completely  restored. 

I  determined  then  that  henceforth  I  would  always  have 
on  hand  some  definite  piece  of  literary  work  which  would 
fill  my  leisure  thoughts  with  interest,  and  protect  me  from 
the  danger  of  listless  idleness. 

So  I  very  soon  set  to  work  at  my  book  on  shorthand.  I 
procured  many  books,  and  studied  many  systems,  and 
spent  much  time  in  comparing  them,  and  before  the  end 


1906-14]         SHORTHAND  AND  SWIFTHAND  405 

of  1907  I  published  my  system  of  Easy  Shorthand.  It  was 
at  once  successful;  four  editions  of  ten  thousand  copies 
each  were  issued,  and  I  am  frequently  hearing  from  distant 
parts  of  the  world  of  its  adoption  and  usefulness.  But  my 
new  system  of  shorthand,  like  any  other  invention,  needs 
to  be  taken  up  by  a  publisher  or  some  great  educational 
establishment,  and  worked  on  commercial  lines,  in  order 
to  be  fully  successful.  I  believe  that  mine  will  gradually 
make  its  way.  At  all  events,  it  cannot  be  bought  up  and 
extinguished,  as  happened  to  a  useful  system  which 
promised  to  be  very  successful  a  good  many  years  ago. 

In  the  course  of  my  studies  of  the  history  of  shorthand 
I  became  much  interested  in  a  statement  made  in  the 
Biographia  Britannica  of  a  "  Lineal  Alphabet  or  Character 
of  Dashes"  which  is  said  to  have  been  used  by  one  Top- 
cliff  e,  wherein  "  every  letter  was  expressed  by  a  single 
straight  stroke,  only  in  different  postures  and  places."  And 
this  interest  was  of  course  deepened  by  examining  the  only 
alphabet  which  answers  his  description,  which  is  in  the 
handwriting  of  Charles  I,  and  signed  and  sealed  by  him, 
and  was  enclosed  in  a  letter  which  he  wrote  from  Oxford, 
to  the  Marquis  of  Worcester  on  April  5th,  1646  (British 
Museum,  Harl.  6988,  121). 

This  alphabet  has  obvious  and  serious  defects,  and  I 
could  find  no  other ;  so  I  determined  to  invent  one,  and  in 
1908  I  published  Swifthand:  a  New  Simple  and  Rapid 
Method  of  Writing. 

My  practice  at  the  Bar,  which  had  fallen  off  with  extra- 
ordinary rapidity  from  1904  to  1907,  steadily  increased 
during  the  next  four  years,  and  did  not  give  me  much 
leisure  for  other  occupations,  but  early  in  1911  I  addressed 
myself  to  a  more  important  task  which  occupied  my  spare 
time  for  over  two  years.  The  discussions  which  arose  in 
that  year  in  connection  with  the  Tercentenary  of  the 
Authorised  Version  of  the  Bible  showed  a  general  agree- 
ment that  there  was  no  satisfactory  version  of  the  New 
Testament  for  use  in  private  reading  or  in  the  public  services 
of  the  Church.  And  an  address  signed  by  one  hundred  of 
27 


406        FROM  LABOUR  TO  REFRESHMENT  [CHAP,  xxxi 

the  foremost  English  representatives  of  theology,  scholar- 
ship, and  literature  was  presented  to  the  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury,  asking  for  "  such  an  emendation  of  the 
Authorised  Version  of  the  New  Testament  as  shall  remove 
all  mistakes,  whether  they  are  due  to  mistranslation  or 
were  the  result  of  the  use  by  King  James's  translators  of  a 
Greek  text  which  later  research  has  shown  to  be  faulty." 

My  own  experience,  for  since  I  became  a  churchwarden 
of  St.  Peter's  in  1902  I  have  been  allowed  to  read  the 
lessons  at  the  Sunday  services,  had  made  me  keenly  sensible 
of  the  need  for  such  an  emendation,  and  I  had  made  it  for 
myself  by  carefully  comparing  the  Authorised  and  Revised 
Versions,  and  adopting  the  alterations  in  the  latter  so  far, 
and  only  so  far,  as  they  either  corrected  material  errors  in 
the  earlier  translation,  or  were  required  in  order  to  make 
clear  the  meaning  of  the  sacred  writer.  This  need  is  most 
strongly  felt  in  the  Pauline  Epistles,  and  before  the  address 
was  presented  to  the  Archbishop  I  had  privately  printed 
and  circulated  a  version  thus  prepared  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Corinthians.  This  was  so  well  received  that  in  February 
1912  I  published  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  (including  in  the 
book  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews),  and  in  August  1913  the 
complete  text  of  the  New  Testament.  I  hear  from  time 
to  time  of  this  book  being  used,  as  it  may  quite  lawfully 
and  properly  be,  in  the  public  worship  of  our  churches. 

Of  my  professional  work  during  the  years  to  which  this 
chapter  relates  there  is  not  much  to  tell. 

My  resignation  of  the  seat  for  the  City  of  London  and 
the  circumstances  by  which  it  was  accompanied  made  an 
end  of  all  political  hopes,  while  my  practice  at  the  Bar 
was  rapidly  diminishing.  This  was  not  strange,  for  the 
manifold  occupations  which  had  fallen  upon  me  in  1906 
were  enough  to  make  my  presence  in  court  so  uncertain 
that  clients  very  wisely  sought  other  representatives.  And 
there  was  a  brilliant  group  of  younger  men,  Rufus  Isaacs, 
John  Simon,  F.  E.  Smith,  and  H.  E.  Duke,  any  one  of  whom 
might  well  be  chosen  to  fill  my  place. 

I  did  not  entirely  give  up  the  hope  that  I  might  become 


1906-14]  BUSY  TO  THE  LAST  407 

a  judge  ;  I  did  not  quite  abandon  that  until  several  years 
later,  for  I  remembered  how  Sir  James  Bacon  was  ap- 
pointed Vice-Chancellor  at  seventy  years  of  age,  and  lived 
to  earn  his  pension  by  fifteen  years  of  service.  But  his 
case  was  exceptional,  and  I  thought,  perhaps  mistakenly, 
that  I  was  less  likely  to  get  judicial  office  from  the  party 
which  I  had  always  opposed  than  from  that  to  which  the 
loyal  service  of  many  years  had  been  given.  However,  as  I 
have  said,  my  practice  soon  began  to  recover,  and  to  the 
end  of  my  half-century  it  continued  to  be  counted  in 
thousands,  although  they  were  very  few  as  compared  with 
the  golden  shower  of  1902.  My  rule  as  to  the  minimum 
fee  was  never  relaxed. 

No  case  of  very  great  public  importance  occurred  in 
those  years ;  but  before  the  Judicial  Committee  of  the  Privy 
Council  I  argued  interesting  questions  sent  from  India  and 
Canada  and  South  Africa. 

The  two  cases  that  interested  me  most  were  the  two 
election  petitions  in  which  I  appeared  after  an  interval  of 
thirty  years. 

At  Hartlepool  in  1910  I  was  defeated  in  the  attempt  to 
defend  the  seat,  to  the  entire  satisfaction  of  my  client  and 
his  family.  Sir  Christopher  Furness  was  no  longer  equal  to 
the  work  of  the  House  of  Commons,  and  the  peerage  which 
was  almost  immediately  bestowed  was  by  no  means  unex- 
pected. In  the  following  year  I  had  a  very  hard  fight,  and  a 
very  pleasant  victory,  at  Nottingham ;  and  it  was  singularly 
interesting  to  me  that  I  should  be  quoting  with  good  effect 
in  defence  of  the  Conservative  member  the  judgement  which 
I  had  listened  to  at  Plymouth  thirty-oneyears  before. 

Perhaps  the  most  curious  of  my  cases  during  this  period 
was  an  action  for  slander  in  which  I  had  three  King's  Counsel 
as  my  juniors.  They  were  of  the  highest  rank,  and  had 
magnificent  fees,  and  were  all  present  during  the  trial,  but 
from  the  beginning  to  the  end  neither  of  them  was  called 
upon  to  say  a  single  word. 

My  appointment  to  the  Privy  Council  in  1908  was  very 
gratifying  and  quite  unexpected.  I  was  dining  at  Lincoln's 


408         FROM  LABOUR  TO  REFRESHMENT  [CHAP,  xxxi 

Inn  on  November  2nd,  Lord  Macnaghten  and  Cozens- 
Hardy,  the  Master  of  the  Rolls,  being  with  me,  and  we  were 
talking  about  Law  Officers,  and  the  cases  in  which  they 
had  failed  to  attain  judicial  rank,  when  a  note  from  the 
Prime  Minister  marked  "  private  "  was  put  into  my  hands. 
It  said,  with  very  pleasant  expressions  of  personal  friend- 
ship, that  he  had  the  pleasure  of  proposing  to  me  with 
the  King's  approval  that  I  should  be  sworn  a  member  of 
the  Privy  Council  on  the  occasion  of  His  Majesty's  birthday. 

Of  course  I  accepted ;  and  I  confess  that  the  offer  gave 
me  so  much  pleasure  that  the  week  which  elapsed  before, 
on  the  morning  of  the  King' s  birthday,  the  public  announce- 
ment was  made  seemed  to  me  a  very  long  week  indeed. 

I  had  a  fine  reception  when  I  went  to  the  Guildhall 
banquet  that  evening,  wearing  for  the  last  time  my  black 
velvet  court  dress,  and  Asquith  told  me  that  my  appoint- 
ment was  by  far  the  most  popular  in  the  day's  list. 

I  soon  had  notice  to  attend  at  Windsor  Castle  to  be 
sworn  in,  and  the  notice  said  "  morning  dress."  So  I 
drove  over  from  Thorncote  on  the  appointed  day  dressed 
in  my  usual  grey  suit.  I  thought  the  servants  who  showed 
me  up  to  the  room  where  we  were  to  wait  looked  at  me 
rather  oddly,  but  the  reason  did  not  occur  to  me.  The 
others  had  not  arrived,  and  I  found  afterwards  they  had 
waited  for  me  a  few  minutes  at  Paddington,  expecting  me 
to  join  the  special  train  which  brought  the  party  from 
London.  There  were  five  of  us  to  be  sworn  of  the 
Council,  and  we  were  rather  an  odd  group.  Sir  Rennell 
Rodd  had  been  appointed  earlier,  and  for  some  reason  had 
delayed  taking  the  oaths.  The  four  new  members  were 
Mr.  J.  A.  Pease,  Mr.  Herbert  Samuel,  Sir  Charles  McLaren, 
and  myself.  Pease,  as  a  Quaker,  had  to  affirm  ;  Samuel, 
a  Jew,  had  to  swear  on  the  Old  Testament  and  with  his 
head  covered  ;  so  the  ceremony  was  rather  a  long  one. 
Three  of  us  took  the  oaths  in  the  ordinary  way  ;  then  Pease 
affirmed.  The  only  difficulty  was  with  Samuel,  but  it  was 
decorously  solved.  He  had  a  new  hat  which  he  held  behind 
his  back.  Just  as  he  kissed  the  book  he  jerked  up  his  hat 


, 


1906-14]  LAW  GUARANTEE  SOCIETY  409 

and  touched  the  top  of  his  head  with  it,  while  King  Edward 
looked  another  way.  We  had  an  excellent  lunch  after- 
wards, served  at  three  rather  large  round  tables,  and  I  sat 
next  a  pretty  young  woman  who  was  a  lady-in-waiting 
to  one  of  the  princesses. 

I  asked  her  what  was  the  rule  of  the  Court  about  morning 
dress.     "  Oh,"  she  said,  "  it  means  black  frock-coats."     I 
asked  if  every  one  staying  at  the  Castle  was  expected  to 
come  to  breakfast  in  a  black  frock-coat.     "  Yes,"  she  said, 
"  that  was  so,  although  the  King  never  met  his  guests  at 
breakfast."     I  said,  "  Do  you  mean  that  they  put  on  black 
frock-coats  whatever  they  are  going   to  do  afterwards  ?  " 
"  Yes,"  she  said,  "  it  is  a  strict  rule."     I  think  she,  like 
the  others,  was  much  amused  by  my  breach  of  etiquette. 
In  1909  I  had  a  heavy  financial  loss,  which  at  the  time 
troubled  me  a  good  deal,  but  has  turned  out  to  be  of  very 
little  consequence.     Twenty  years  before  a  group  of  London 
solicitors,  all  men  of  high  position  in  their  profession,  and 
all  men  of  great  experience  and  of  the  highest  honour, 
established  the  Law  Guarantee  Society.     The  plan  was 
sound,   their  influence  was  very  great,  and  the  venture 
was  immediately  successful.     Only  one-tenth  of  the  sub- 
scribed capital  was  called  up,  and  upon  the  money  so  paid 
10  per  cent,  interest  was  regularly  paid  for  nearly  twenty 
years.     Then  whispers  got  about  that  things  were  going 
wrong,  and  in  1908  Lord  Alverstone  and  I,  who  were  both 
large  shareholders,  and  I  think  one  or  two  others  who  could 
be  completely  trusted,  were  told  that  the  difficulties  were 
serious.     The  fact  was  that  in  1888-9  the  prosperity  of  the 
country  was  at  its  highest  level,  and  the  prospects  of  every 
commercial   undertaking   appeared   to   justify   courageous 
speculation  upon  the  future.     This  was  especially  the  case 
with  undertakings  concerned  with  the  liquor,  traffic  or  with 
public  amusements,  and  unfortunately  the  larger  part  of 
the  early  business  of  the  new  society  was  in  lending  money 
on  mortgage  of  properties  of  this  description.     The  directors 
were  advised  by  surveyors  of  the  best  repute,  who  probably 
would   have   been   more  careful  if   they  had   themselves 


4io         FROM  LABOUR  TO  REFRESHMENT  [CHAP,  xxxi 

shared  the  directors'  responsibility.  These  valuations  were 
too  costly  to  be  repeated  periodically,  and  the  result  was 
that  vast  sums  were  lent  on  public  houses,  and  breweries, 
and  hotels,  and  theatres,  which,  when  the  society  foreclosed 
the  mortgage  and  took  possession,  could  not  have  been 
carried  on  at  a  profit,  even  if  the  officials  had  always  been 
scrupulously  honest.  All  the  directors  stood  manfully  by 
the  failing  venture,  and  were  themselves  among  the  heaviest 
losers  when  the  crash  came  and  the  society  failed  with 
liabilities  of  eight  millions  of  money. 

I  was  a  shareholder,  and  a  debenture  holder,  and  had 
subscribed  for  debentures  guaranteed  by  the  society ;  and 
I  found  that  the  modest  income  which  I  thought  I  had 
secured  for  my  days  of  retirement  was  reduced  by  about 
one-third. 

So  I  was  obliged  to  leave  my  pleasant  but  expensive 
home  at  Thorncote.  It  fortunately  happened  that  two  or 
three  years  before  my  fellow-churchwarden  and  I  had 
jointly  purchased  a  strip  of  land  at  the  side  of  the  church 
grounds  and  with  a  frontage  to  the  towing-path.  We 
feared  that  it  might  be  bought  by  a  speculative  builder 
and  used  for  a  row  of  cottages.  I  now  bought  out  my 
partner  in  the  ownership,  and  there  built  a  small  house 
in  a  delightful  situation,  which  we  have  found  quite  large 
enough  for  comfort,  and  which  I  hope  will  some  day  serve 
as  a  not  too  expensive  vicarage. 

As  politics  no  longer  filled  my  thoughts,  and  the  law 
was  making  less  and  less  demand  upon  my  time,  the  third 
great  interest  of  my  life  came  to  fill  a  more  important  place. 
During  all  those  years  of  absorbing  professional  work,  years 
spent  in  learning  and  forgetting  the  details  of  the  quarrels 
of  others,  or  of  the  perpetual  conflict  between  law  and 
crime,  there  had  often  come  to  my  mind  the  pathetic 
opening  lines  of  one  of  Trench's  finest  sonnets  : 

"To  leave  so  many  lands  unvisited, 
To  leave  so  many  glorious  books  unread." 

I  had  tried,  as  the  last  chapter  will  have  shown,  to  use  to 


1906-14]  THE  EARTHLY   PARADISE  411 

the  full  my  opportunities  of  travel,  and  I  had  often  hoped 
that  "  in  those  may-be  years  I  had  to  live  "  some  short 
space  of  quiet  time  might  be  granted  me  to  turn  back  to 
those  pleasures  of  literature  which  had  been  the  delight 
of  my  boyhood.  The  famous  passage  in  which  Nicold 
Machiavelli,  in  the  year  when  his  political  employments 
ceased,  described  in  a  letter  to  his  friend  the  joys  of  a  library 
often  haunted  my  thoughts. 

But  when  evening  falls  I  put  off  my  country  habit  filthy 
with  mud  and  mire,  and  array  myself  in  royal  court  garments. 
Thus  worthily  attired  I  make  my  entrance  into  the  ancient 
courts  of  the  men  of  old,  where  they  receive  me  with  love, 
and  where  I  feed  upon  that  food  which  only  is  my  own, 
and  for  which  I  was  born.  They,  moved  by  their  humanity, 
make  answer  :  for  four  hours'  space  I  feel  no  vexation. 
Poverty  cannot  frighten,  nor  death  appal  me. 

My  library  is  richer  than  that  of  the  famous  Florentine, 
for  he  had  only  the  literature  of  Italy,  in  its  ancient  or  its 
modern  tongue,  while  I,  subject  to  limitations  of  language, 
have  all  the  wealth  of  the  four  centuries  which  have  passed 
since  he  wrote  those  words.  Those  limitations  are  indeed 
sometimes  irksome,  when  I  think  of  the  fortunate  ones  to 
whom  the  circumstances  of  their  youth  have  given  the 
opportunity  of  learning  to  enjoy  in  their  original  beauty  the 
masterpieces  of  the  great  writers  of  classic  times.  But  I  do 
not  think  of  them  with  any  soreness  of  envy.  ^Eschylus, 
Plato,  and  Virgil  are  not  for  me.  But  I  have  Shakespeare, 
and  Bacon,  and  Milton,  and  all  their  troop  of  worthy  suc- 
cessors, and  I  feel  no  need  of  more.  Others  may  feed  in 
a  wider  pasture,  but  they  have  no  better  food. 

And  here  I  have  passed  from  the  labour  of  life  to  its 
time  of  refreshment. 

I  am  sitting  in  my  library— I  planned  the  house,  so  of 
course  it  is  the  largest  room — sarrounded  by  my  books. 
On  the  top  of  the  low  book-shelves  stand  a  few  choice 
bronzes,  Voltaire  and  Rousseau  among  them,  and  some 
fine  specimens  of  my  favourite  Martin-ware.  On  the  walls 


412        FROM  LABOUR  TO  REFRESHMENT  [CHAP,  xxxi 

are  some  proofs  of  Landseer  and  Rosa  Bonheur,  and  the 
likenesses  of  Pitt,  and  Fox,  and  Canning,  and  Wellington, 
and  Peel. 

Chief  treasures  of  all  are  Biscombe  Gardner's  portrait 
of  my  great  master  in  politics,  as  he  stood  in  the  House  of 
Lords  in  1878  and  spoke  of  the  Berlin  Treaty ;  and  his 
favourite  clock  which  now  stands  upon  my  mantel-shelf. 

I  look  from  the  windows  over  the  green  turf  of  the  church 
grounds,  and  across  the  silver  stream,  and  through  the 
thinning  autumn  leaves  see  the  low  outline  of  the  Surrey 
hills. 

There  could  be  no  sweeter  surroundings,  and  I  turn  back 
to  my  desk  in  full  contentment  to  write  the  closing  pages 
of  this  book. 


CHAPTER    XXXII 

THE   END   OF  THE    STORY  I    1 914 

EARLY  in  the  year  1914  I  had  to  respond  for  "  The  Bar  " 
at  a  city  dinner,  where  many  lawyers  were  present,  and, 
tempted  into  reminiscence  and  forecast,  I  noted  that  I  was 
in  my  fiftieth  year  of  active  practice,  and  that  I  did  not 
intend  to  continue  in  legal  work  after  the  close  of  the  half- 
century. 

At  the  end  of  May  the  first  words  of  public  farewell  were 
said  most  appropriately  at  the  Old  Bailey,  where  my  earliest 
and  my  most  notable  successes  had  been  won.  I  was  now 
appearing  for  the  principal  defendant  in  a  very  important 
case,  and  my  friend  Sir  John  Simon,  who  some  years  bejore 
had  held  his  first  brief  in  a  criminal  case  as  my  junior 
in  the  defence  of  Mrs.  Penruddock,  was  now  prosecuting 
as  Attorney-General.  The  judge,  Sir  Charles  Darling, 
between  whom  and  myself 3  there  has  always  been  some 
fellowship  in  literature,  as  well  as  in  politics  and  law,  said 
very  kind  things  about  me,  and  although  I  appeared  later 
in  the  civil  courts,  this  was  practically  the  end  of  my  legal 
work. 

But  there  was  reserved  for  me  a  crowning  honour.  On 
July  I7th,  the  latest  day  available  before  the  beginning  of 
the  Long  Vacation,  the  Bench  and  Bar  entertained  me  at 
a  dinner  in  Lincoln's  Inn  Hall,  at  which  two  hundred  and 
fifty  of  my  brethren  in  the  law  assembled  to  do  me  honour. 

It  was  impossible  for  me  look  along  their  ranks  without 
pride  and  emotion. 

Haldane,  the  Lord  Chancellor,  was  in  the  chair,  and  the 
Attorney-General  sat  upon  his  left,  and  shared  the  duty  of 

4*3 


414  THE  END  OF  THE  STORY      [CHAP,  xxxn 

proposing  my  health.  Twenty-five  judges  were  there,  and 
those  who  had  been  kept  away  by  circuit  duties  or  ill- 
health  sent  their  regrets  and  congratulations.  Over  a 
hundred  King's  Counsel  were  at  the  tables,  and  wherever 
I  looked  some  faded  recollection  of  legal  work  came  back 
with  sudden  freshness.  It  is  dangerous  to  mention  names, 
for  one  knows  not  where  to  stop.  But  some  must  be 
noted.  Next  to  me  on  my  right  sat  the  Nestor  of  the  Law 
— Halsbury — in  full  activity  of  mind  and  body,  although 
he  carried  the  weight  of  ninety-one  toilsome  years.  At 
every  step  of  my  life  in  politics  and  in  law  he  had  been  my 
companion  and  my  friend.  Courtney  had  known  me  before 
I  was  called.  Morley's  presence  I  felt  as  a  special  honour. 
Rathmore  embodied  all  my  pleasantest  recollections  of  the 
House  of  Commons.  Moulton,  Reading,  Sumner,  Finlay, 
Cave,  F.  E.  Smith,  Henry  Dickens,  Balfour  Browne,  Poland, 
H.  E.  Duke,  brought  back  memories  of  forensic  conflicts. 
Almost  all  the  judges  had  at  one  time  or  another  spoken 
of  me  as  "  my  learned  leader."  Thirty-four  years  had 
passed  since  I  took  pupils,  but  four  of  my  old  pupils  were 
there  to  meet  me.  Both  my  sons  were  there,  both  barristers, 
one  of  eighteen  years'  standing,  one  of  eight.  And  in  the 
gallery  my  daughter  and  her  soldier  husband  sat  with 
Lady  Clarke. 

That  was  the  closing  scene  of  my  public  life. 

But  there  is  something  yet  to  be  added. 

Charles  Russell  said  to  a  friend  who  asked  for  infor- 
mation that  would  help  him  to  write  a  biography,  "  Don't 
you  think  that  the  best  thing  I  could  do  would  be  to  write 
my  own  life  from  my  own  point  of  view  ?  "  That  is  what  I 
have  done  in  this  volume.  But  I  do  not  think  the  book 
would  be  complete  if  I  stopped  at  this  sentence.  The 
reader  who  has  been  interested  in  this  story  would  like  to 
know  the  thoughts  and  feelings  of  the  chief  actor  in  the 
drama  of  life  which  has  been  here  narrated,  as  he  looked 
back  over  the  incidents  of  his  own  career.  I  expressed 
them  frankly  in  my  speech  that  night,  and  with  the  quota- 
tion of  that  speech  I  close  the  record. 


1914]  A   RETROSPECT  415 

It  is  very  difficult  for  me  to  make  reply  to  the  speeches 
which  have  just  been  delivered,  or  to  thank  you  for  the 
great  honour  that  you  are  doing  to  me  in  this  assembly  of 
my  brethren  of  the  law,  who  are  offering  to  me  an  un- 
exampled honour  to-night.  The  most  difficult  task  of  all  my 
professional  life  has  been  reserved  for  its  close — it  is  difficult 
indeed  to  make  response,  and  perhaps  dangerous  to  try  to 
make  any.  I  am  here  to  take  your  verdict  upon  my  career 
and  character,  and  there  has  been  a  curious  inversion  of  the 
ordinary  practice  of  our  courts.  The  Lord  Chancellor  has 
pronounced  judicial  and  reasoned  judgement,  and  after  he 
has  given  that  judgement,  the  Attorney-General  has  made 
an  eloquent  speech  for  the  defence,  and  now,  when  these 
are  finished  and  all  is  over,  except  the  shouting — and  there 
has  been  some  of  that — I  am  called  upon  to  speak  for 
myself.  But  the  court  is  so  clearly  in  my  favour  that  to 
make  any  reply  at  all  is  rather  dangerous,  as  it  might 
suggest  to  the  judges  that  after  all  there  was  some  reason 
to  think  that  something  might  be  said  on  the  other  side. 
But  I  can,  of  course,  try  to  answer  the  matter  of  these 
very  kind  and  generous  speeches.  Apart  from  the  merits 
which  friendship  to-night  has  magnified,  or  the  defects 
which  friendship  to-night  is  kind  enough  to  forget,  there 
is  only,  indeed,  one  matter  referred  to  on  which  I  can  fitly 
speak,  and  that  is  the  unusual  length  of  my  career  at  the 
Bar.  Fifty  years  have  passed  of  active  work  at  the  Bar 
from  beginning  to  end.  There  were  twenty-two  years 
of  upward  strife  ;  there  were  six  years  of  Law  Office  ;  and 
since  then  there  have  been  twenty-two  years  of  private 
practice,  continuing  to  the  end  not  as  nominal  practice, 
but  as  substantial  and— I  say  it  under  my  breath— lucra- 
tive practice  down  to  this  very  month.  My  life  at  the  Bar 
began  before  the  Law  Reports  were  born,  but  every  year 
the  Law  Reports  have  contained  a  record  of  some  of  its 
incidents.  In  the  first  volume  of  the  Privy  Council 
Reports  a  case  is  mentioned  in  which  my  name  appears  as 
counsel  when  I  was  junior  in  a  very  important  criminal 
appeal  to  Hardinge  Giffard,  and  I  believe  that  the  Law 
Reports  of  the  King's  Bench  Division  for  next  month  will 
contain  a  Report  of  the  latest  argument  of  mine  in  the 
King's  Bench.  That  pretty  completely  fills  the  fifty  years. 
It  is  a  proud  moment  for  me  to  stand  in  the  midst  of  this 
great  gathering  of  the  chiefs  and  leaders  of  my  profession 


416  THE  END  OF  THE  STORY     [CHAP,  xxxn 

and  to  be  assured  by  them,  as  you  have  assured  me  to-night, 
that  throughout  these  fifty  years  I  have  maintained  the 
noble  traditions  of  the  English  Bar.  The  name  which  I 
have  just  mentioned  suggests  the  only  personal  reminis- 
cence upon  which  I  will  venture  to-night.  My  firm  resolve 
to  make  my  way  to  the  Bar  dates  from  the  night  when 
nearly  sixty  years  ago  I  heard  in  the  House  of  Lords  Lord 
Lyndhurst,  then  eighty-eight  years  of  age,  make  a  speech, 
and  I  noted  the  respect  and  almost  reverence  with  which  he 
was  treated  in  that  House.  My  first  case  reported  at  the 
Bar  before  the  Law  Reports  existed  is  to  be  found  in  The 
Law  Journal  for  April  27th,  1865,  when  I  was  junior  to 
McMahon  in  an  extradition  case,  and  the  leader  on  the 
other  side  again  was  Hardinge  Giffard.  My  leader  was  just 
finishing  his  argument,  and  Giffard  spoke  to  me  and  said, 
"  How  long  do  you  think  you  will  be  ?  "  "  Oh  !  "  I  said, 
"  I  don't  think  he  has  left  anything  for  me  to  say.  I  don't 
think  I  need  follow."  "  Never  mind,"  said  Giffard,  "  you 
go  on  ;  you  want  the  judges  to  know  you,  and  you  want 
to  get  used  to  hearing  your  own  voice  in  the  courts."  I 
followed  that  good  advice,  and  I  have  been  grateful  for 
that  good  advice  during  all  the  fifty  years  that  have  passed 
since.  From  that  day  to  this  Giffard  has  been  my  kind 
friend,  and  it  is  one  of  my  greatest  pleasures  in  standing 
here  to-night  to  receive  this  tribute  of  your  kindness  and 
goodwill  that  there  should  be  sitting  next  to  me  the  Lynd- 
hurst of  our  day,  who  has  come  to  join  in  doing  me  honour. 
There  is  one  drawback  to  the  profession  of  the  Bar,  and  it 
is  this — that  the  barrister's  work,  however  well  it  may  be 
done,  is  rarely  known  beyond  his  own  generation.  There 
are,  no  doubt,  from  time  to  time,  cases  of  great  public 
importance  like,  for  instance,  the  Jameson  case,  or  perhaps 
still  more  like  the  Parnell  divorce  case,  leading  to  very 
great  and  far-reaching  political  results ;  but  although  the 
names  of  these  cases  will  be  found  in  history,  the  names  of 
the  counsel  engaged  in  them  are  unimportant  and  very  soon 
forgotten.  But  there  is  one  way  in  which  an  advocate  may 
seek  to  secure  some  longer  recollection  of  his  work.  Oratory 
has  a  literature  of  its  own.  The  delightful  and  sadly  neg- 
lected art  of  rhetoric  finds  its  best  illustration  in  forensic 
speech,  and  if  an  advocate  addresses  himself  to  his  work, 
not  only  to  the  practical  end  of  securing  a  verdict,  but  with 
the  desire  that  his  speeches  shall  have  some  literary  quality, 


1914]  LEISURE;    NOT  IDLENESS  417 

there  is  a  possibility  that  they  may  be  remembered  later. 
I  have  done  my  best.  The  output  of  fifty  years  seems  very 
small,  but  there  are  six  speeches — three  in  the  Criminal 
Courts,  three  in  the  Civil  Courts — which  I  hope  may  be 
remembered  for  some  time  even  after  my  generation  has 
passed  away.  Let  me  say  that  I  have  been  anxious  to 
make  better  acknowledgment  of  your  kindness  to  me 
to-night  than  could  be  conveyed  in  an  inadequate  speech, 
so  I  have  done  myself  the  pleasure  of  writing  my  name  and 
the  date  to-day  in  sufficient  copies  of  my  volume  of  speeches 
to  provide  one  for  every  diner  at  these  tables.  I  shall  be 
grateful  to  you  if,  when  you  leave  this  hall,  you  will  each 
kindly  take  one  of  these  packets  and  accept  it  and  keep  it 
as  a  souvenir  of  your  kindness  and  of  my  gratitude. 

You  have  spoken  of  the  leisure  to  which  I  may  now  look 
forward,  and  you,  my  Lord  Chancellor,  have  very  kindly 
encouraged  me  in  the  hope,  which  I  trust  may  be  at  some 
time  gratified,  that,  although  I  am  parted  from  professional 
work  at  the  Bar,  I  may  be  able  to  do  some  service  to  the 
public  in  some  capacity  for  which  my  experience  and  know- 
ledge may  have  fitted  me.  I  do  not  think  that  leisure  will 
be  passed  idly ;  in  fact,  the  increasing  leisure  of  the  last 
few  years  has  not  been  wholly  wasted.  I  have  written  the 
story  of  my  life  for  forty  years.  I  have  prepared  the  best 
English  version  of  the  New  Testament  that  has  ever  been 
published.  I  have  contrived  the  easiest  system  of  short- 
hand that  any  one  could  learn.  I  have  invented  the  simplest 
alphabet  that  the  world  has  ever  seen.  I  am  not  speaking 
of  these  things  to  claim  any  great  credit  for  them.  There 
is  hardly  any  one  in  this  hall  who  could  not  have  done  any 
of  them  if  the  thought  had  occurred  to  him,  and  if  he  had 
been  willing  to  give  the  labour  and  the  time  which  were 
necessary  for  the  work.  But  at  all  events,  I  hope  it  may  be 
an  assurance  that  the  leisure  which  I  am  hereafter  to  enjoy 
is  not  likely  to  be  wholly  wasted.  You  have  spoken  of  my 
public  and  political  life.  I  have  had  two  great  disappoint- 
ments, serious  disappointments  ;  one  which  tried  me  very 
hard  indeed,  and  one  which  was  of  comparatively  minor 
significance.  I  did  not  come  to  the  Bar  from  any  attraction 
for  the  study  of  law,  but  I  came  to  the  Bar  because  I 
believed  that  through  this  profession,  and  through  this 
alone,  I  might  be  able  to  make  my  way  to  political  influence 
and  position.  For  a  time  all  went  well.  Before  I  was 


4r8  THE  END  OF  THE  STORY     [CHAP,  xxxn 

forty  years  of  age,  which,  considering  my  commencement, 
was  early,  I  had  a  seat  in  the  House  of  Commons.  Within 
six  years  I  had  become  Solicitor-General,  and  then  I  had 
six  years  of  the  pleasantest  association  with  my  dear  friend 
Richard  Webster,  who  wrote  to  me  yesterday,  as  well  as 
writing  to  the  chairman,  and  from  whom  I  was  glad  to 
hear  that  he  was  so  much  better  that  he  hoped  next  week 
to  return  to  his  home  at  Winterfold.  Those  six  years 
passed.  I  had  three  years  of  even  greater  enjoyment  in 
active  work  on  the  Front  Opposition  Bench,  the  most 
delightful  position  in  the  House  of  Commons.  But  there 
came  a  time  a  little  later  when,  upon  a  very  grave  question 
of  public  importance,  I  found  myself  in  conflict  with  the 
leaders  of  my  own  party,  and  with  the  popular  feeling  of 
the  time.  I  could  not  make  terms  with  my  conscience.  I 
acted  as  I  believed  to  be  right,  and  my  political  ambitions 
and  hopes  suddenly  passed  into  shadow.  There  was  an 
afterglow,  where  afterglows  are  not  often  seen,  in  the  City 
of  London  ;  but  an  afterglow,  however  interesting  and  even 
brilliant  it  may  be,  is  never  the  beginning  of  a  new  day,  and 
so  the  political  hopes  vanished.  And  then  there  came  to 
my  mind  the  hope  that  I  might  be  thought  worthy  of  wear- 
ing the  judicial  ermine.  That  dignity,  indeed,  had  been 
offered  to  me  some  years  before,  but  it  was  at  a  time  when 
my  political  ambition  had  not  suffered  eclipse,  and  I  refused 
it.  No  opportunity  of  acceptance  was  given  later,  and  so 
it  comes  to  pass  that  at  the  end  of  these  fifty  years  I  finish 
as  I  began,  as  a  private  member  of  the  English  Bar.  To 
some  that  will  look  like  failure,  and  indeed,  of  late  years, 
I  have  been  fond  of  quoting  the  beginning  of  that  fine 
sonnet  of  Trench  which  begins,  "  Not  all  who  seem  to  fail 
have  failed  indeed." 

But  there  has  been  no  failure,  and  I  have  no  reproaches 
or  regrets.  If  success  in  life  is  to  be  measured  in  terms  of 
personal  happiness,  as  I  think  it  ought  to  be,  then  no  man 
ever  had  a  more  successful  life  than  mine.  God  has  blessed 
me  with  health  in  mind  and  body,  and  has  given  me  many 
kind  and  faithful  friends.  I  have  spent  my  life  in  the 
practice  of  the  most  interesting  profession  in  the  world.  I 
have  had  golden  opportunities  of  distinction,  both  in 
politics  and  on  the  forensic  side  of  law,  and  my  political 
and  professional  activities  have  had  for  their  background  a 
domestic  life  of  complete  and  continuous  happiness.  I  am 


1914]  LAST  WORDS  419 

grateful  to  the  committee  and  to  you  that  the  authors  and 
sharers  of  that  happiness,  chief  of  them  my  dear  wife,  have 
the  opportunity  of  being  here  to-night.  It  cannot  but  be 
that  in  the  course  of  half  a  century  of  keen  and  constant 
and  strenuous  controversy  I  have  from  time  to  time  been 
unfair  and  discourteous  to  my  opponents  (cries  of  "  No, 
No")  and  have  failed  to  appreciate  and  to  acknowledge 
the  help  that  has  been  given  me  by  my  juniors.  There 
must  in  such  a  time  have  been  such  cases.  It  has  never 
been  from  malice  or  jealousy,  but  it  may  have  happened  in 
the  stress  of  very  hard  work  and  very  great  responsibility. 
I  hope  that  when  I  leave  this  hall  to-night  I  may  feel  that 
all  such  faults  have  been  fully  and  freely  forgiven,  and  that 
there  is  not  a  cloud  to  dim  the  memory  of  the  happy  half- 
century  of  work  of  which  this  is  the  closing  scene.  Once 
more  with  all  my  heart  I  thank  you. 

When  the  speeches  were  over  Lady  Clarke  and  my  sons 
and  daughter  joined  me  in  the  Benchers'  Parlour,  and  there 
we  received  the  farewell  congratulations  of  many  friends. 
Then,  with  my  wife  and  daughter  and  my  daughter's 
husband,  I  motored  down  to  my  home  at  Staines.  There 
was  little  talking  on  the  way.  My  heart  was  full  of  thank- 
fulness to  God  Who  had  given  me  health  and  strength  for 
fifty  years  of  strenuous  work,  and  had  surrounded  me  at 
their  close  with  so  much  love  and  honour. 


LIST    OF    THE    PLACES    OUTSIDE    LONDON    AT 
WHICH  I  HAVE  MADE  POLITICAL  SPEECHES 


Ascot 

Ashton-under-Lyne 

Aylesbury 

Barnet 

Barnstaple 

Bath 

Bedford 

Bewdley 

Bideford 

Birmingham 

Bishop's  Stortford 

Blackburn 

Bradford 

Bridport 

Brighton 

Bromley 

Callington 

Camborne 

Cambridge 

Canterbury 

Cardiff 

Chatham 

Cheltenham 

Chertsey 

Clifton 

Colchester 

Coventry 

Croydon 

Darlington 

Darwen 

Devonport 

28 


Doncaster 

Dover 

Dublin 

Durham 

Eastbourne 

Edinburgh 

Enfield 

Epsom 

Eridge 

Evesham 

Exeter 

Falmouth 

Felixstowe 

Folkestone 

Frome 

Glasgow 

Gloucester 

Grantham 

Gravesend 

Guildford 

Hartlepool 

Harwich 

Hastings 

Hertford 

Hull 

Ipswich 

Kettering 

Kidderminster 

King's  Lynn 

Leeds 

Lewes 


421 


422    PLACES  WHERE  I   HAVE  MADE  SPEECHES 


Liskeard 

Liverpool 

Luton 

Maidstone 

Manchester 

Newcastle-on-Tyne 

Newton  Abbot 

Northampton 

Oldham 

Paignton 

Parkstone 

Penzance 

Petersfield 

Plymouth 

Poole 

Portsmouth 

Preston 

Reading 

Richmond 

Rochdale 

Saffron  Walden 

St.  Ives 

Salisbury 

Sheffield 

Slough 

Southampton 


Southend-on-Sea 

Stourport 

Sunderland 

Sutton 

Swansea 

Swindon 

Taunton 

Tavistock 

Teignmouth 

Tiverton 

Tonbridge 

Torquay 

Trowbridge 

Tunbridge  Wells 

Twickenham 

Uxbridge 

Wadebridge 

Warwick 

West  Bromwich 

West  Ham 

Whitby 

Winchester 

Windsor 

Woodstock 

Yeovil 

York 


INDEX 


Abbs,  Mr.,  260 

Abergavenny,  William,  5th  Earl 
of,  96 

Acland-Hood,  Sir  Alexander  (after- 
wards Lord  St.  Audries),  386, 

389 
Adams,  Mr.,  editor  of  The  Western 

Mail,  101 

Administrative  Reform  Associa- 
tion, meeting  at  Drury  Lane 

Theatre,  43 

Africa,  South,  war  in,  354,  364 
Agg-Gardner,    Sir    James,    election 

petition  cases,  102,  175 
Akers-Douglas,  Rt.  Hon.  A.  (Lord 

Chilston),  at  the   Conference  on 

Tariff  Reform,  381 
Albert  Hall,  meetings  at,  112  note, 

399 

Aldenham,  Alban,  Baron,  375 
Alexander  II,  Emperor  of  Russia, 

memorial  to,  342 
Algar,  William,  Mayor  of  Plymouth, 

256 

Algeciras,  387 
Allen,  Dr.  Thomas,  58 
Alverstorie,   Richard,   Baron,   399 ; 

member     of    the     Ecclesiastical 

Discipline  Commission,  401.    See 

Webster 
Anderson,    Mary,    appearance,    72, 

J95 
Anson,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  William,  at  a 

meeting  against  Tariff   Reform, 

382 

Arnold,  Matthew,  40 
Arts,  Society  of,  examinations,  30, 

32 

Ashley,  Evelyn,  65 

Askwith,  George,  282 

Asquith,  Rt.  Hon.  H.  H.,  Home 
Secretary,  313  ;  Welsh  Church 
Disestablishment  Bill,  313 

Aston  Park,  riot  at,  218 

Atkinson,  Judge,  82 

Austen,  Jane,  39 


Avis,  Mrs.,  139,  143 
Avory,  Horace,  327 
Axbridge,  5 


Bacon,  Vice-Chancellor  Sir  James, 
407 

Balfour,  Rt.  Hon.  A.  J.,  member 
of  the  National  Union  Central 
Committee,  216,  217  ;  restora- 
tion of  peace  and  order  in  Ire- 
land, 270  ;  on  the  proposal  to 
carry  on  Bills,  288  ;  changes  in 
his  Cabinet,  371  ;  defeat  at  Man- 
chester, 377  ;  M.P.  for  the  City 
of  London,  380  ;  relations  with 
Sir  E.  Clarke,  380,  388  ;  negotia- 
tions on  Tariff  Reform,  381  ; 
speech  on  Tariff  Reform,  383  ; 
treatment  of  Sir  E.  Clarke,  388, 
390 

Balfour,  Rt.  Hon.  Gerald,  at  the 
Conference  on  Tariff  Reform,  381 

Balfour,  Miss,  380 

Ballantine,  William,  characteristics, 
8 1  ;  visit  to  India,  81  ;  at  Bou- 
logne, 8 1 

Banbury,  Sir  Frederick,  375 

Bankruptcy  Bill,  204,  206,  208 

Barlow,  William,  54 

Barnett,  Mr.,  agent  of  the  Duke  of 
Marl  borough,  107 

Barnett,  Mr.,  candidate  for  Dover, 
104 

Barran,  Mr.,  204 

Barrington,  George,  7th  Viscount, 
1 66 

Bartlett,  Adelaide,  marriage,  246; 
relations  with  G.  Dyson,  247  ; 
death  of  her  husband,  248  ;  trial, 
249-253,  acquitted,  253 

Bartlett,  Thomas  Edwin,  marriage, 
246 ;  relations  with  his  wife, 
247  ;  death,  248 

Bates,  Sir  Edward,  election  peti- 
tion case,  183  ;  candidate  for 


4-3 


424 


INDEX 


Plymouth,  235,  244,  255 ;  re- 
tires, 315 

Bath,  5,  1 08 

Beaconsfield,  Benjamin,  Earl  of, 
kindness  to  Sir  E.  Clarke,  164, 
165 ;  death,  189 ;  portrait  of, 
241.  See  Disraeli 

Beal,  Edward,  249 

Beaty  v.  Gilbanks,  298 

Bechuanaland  British  Protector- 
ate, 324 

Begg,  Faithful,  375 

Behr,  George,  69 

Belgium,  235 

Bellew,  Rev.  J.  M.,  Blount  Tempest, 
85  ;  criticism  on,  85 

Benjamin,  Judah  P.,  271 

Bennett,  Thomas  Randall,  lectures 
on  Constitutional  Law,  59;  pupils, 

65 

Benson,  Harry,  schemes  of  fraud, 
139 ;  the  Great  Turf  Fraud 
trial,  139-147 ;  cross-examina- 
tion, 145 

Bentinck,  Lord  George,  18 

Beresford,  Colonel  Marcus,  M.P.  for 
South  war  k,  103,  156 

Bernays,  Sir  Albert,  112 

Bevan,  Mr.,  election  petition  case, 

Bexhill,  31 

Bigham,  John  C.,  279.    See  Mersey 

Bills,  proposal  to  carry  on,  from 
session  to  session,  192,  204,  287  ; 
Committee  appointed,  288 

Binnie,  Sir  Alexander,  391 

Birmingham,  Conference  of  the 
National  Union,  214 

Biron,  Robert,  175 

Blackburn,  Mr.  Justice,  83 

Blair,  Mr.,  368 

Blake,  Mr.,  on  Irish  finance,  334 

Blandford,  Marquess  of,  relations 
with  the  Prince  of  Wales,  213 

Boer  War,  354,  364 

Booth,  General,  organisation  of  the 
Salvation  Army,  298 

Borthwick,  Sir  Algernon,  election 
petition  case,  176  ;  on  the  pro- 
posal to  carry  on  Bills,  288.  See 
Glenesk 

Bousfield,  Major,  108 

Bradlaugh,  Charles,  66 ;  contro- 
versy in  the  House  of  Commons, 
189,  192 

Bramwell,  Baron,  272 

Bright,  Rt.  Hon.  John,  167 

Brighton,  308  ;    election,  372 

Brindisi,  318 


Bristowe,  Dr.  J.  SM  126 ;   evidence 

on  the  Penge  case,  127 
British  Guiana,  boundaries  of,  319- 

323 

Brodribb,  Thomas,  31 

Brodrick,  Hon.  George,  candidate 
for  Woodstock,  107 

Bronte,  Charlotte,  40 

Brougham,  Henry,  ist  Baron,  Lives 
of  the  Statesmen  of  the  Reign  of 
George  III,  43  ;  at  a  meeting  of 
the  Working  Men's  Club,  63,  64 

Brown,  Clara,  123  ;  evidence  at  the 
Penge  trial,  128 

Brown,  George,  evidence  at  the 
Macclesfield  election  petition  case, 
181 

Brown,  Joseph,  86 

Browne,  Balfour,  K.C.,  at  the  fare- 
well dinner  to  Sir  E.  Clarke,  414 

Browning,  Mrs.,  40 

Browning,  Robert,  40 

Bruce,  Mr.  Justice  Gainsford,  375 

Bryant,  Kathleen,  194 ;  appear- 
ance, 195  ;  marriage,  195.  See 
Clarke 

Buckland,  Virgo,  200 

Bucknill,  Mr.  Justice  Thomas, 
Counsel  for  the  Defence  in  the 
West  of  England  Bank  case,  173 

Burnaby,  Colonel,  elected  member 
of  the  National  Union,  217 

Butt,  Sir  Charles,  Judge  in  the 
Parnell  divorce  case,  289 

Butterfield,  Mrs.,  121 

Byron,  Lord,  39  ;    anecdote  of,  70 

Cadogan,  George,  5th  Earl,  at  the 
debate  on  the  Home  Rule  Bill, 

3°9 

Cairns,  Hugh,  ist  Earl,  205 

Cairo,  387 

Campbell-Bannerman,  Rt.  Hon. 
Sir  Henry,  383 

Canada,  366 

Candlewick  Ward  Club,  meetings 
8 

Canning,  Rt.  Hon.  George,  5 

Cannon  Street  Hotel,  meeting,  388 

Canterbury,  election  petition  case, 
177 

Cardiff,  meetings  at,  101,  109 

Carlyle,  Thomas,  40 

Carson,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  Edward,  328 

Casabianca,  Mr.,  120,  122 

Cattley,  Mark,  163  ;  candidate  for 
South  war  k,  169 

Causton,  Richard,  M.P.  for  Col- 
chester, 174.  See  South wark 


INDEX 


425 


Cave,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  George,  at  the 
farewell  dinner  to  Sir  E.  Clarke, 
414 

Cave,  Mr.  Justice  Lewis,  175 

Cavendish,  Ada,  appearance,  74  ; 
costume,  74  ;  career,  74 

Cavendish,  Victor  (Duke  of  Devon- 
shire), at  a  meeting  against  Tariff 
Reform,  382 

Chamberlain,  Rt.  Hon.  Austen,  at 
the  conference  on  Tariff  Reform, 
381 

Chamberlain,  Rt.  Hon.  Joseph, 
President  of  the  Board  of  Trade, 
204  ;  Bankruptcy  Bill,  204,  208  ; 
attack  on  shipowners,  209  ;  Mer- 
chant Shipping  Bill,  210;  ad- 
mitted to  office,  211  ;  relations 
with  W.  E.  Gladstone,  211,  212  ; 
personality,  212  ;  character  of 
his  speeches,  212  ;  resignation, 
246,  371  ;  relations  with  Lord 
Hartington,  264  ;  at  the  Round 
Table  Conference,  264  ;  plan  of 
National  Councils  for  Ireland, 
264  ;  article  in  The  Baptist,  264  ; 
on  the  proposal  to  carry  on  Bills, 
288  ;  Colonial  Secretary,  324  ; 
Workmen's  Compensation  Bill, 
339  ;  negotiations  with  South 
Africa,  346,  350  ;  Tariff  Reform 
scheme,  367,  381 

Channel  Tunnel  Bill,  271 

Chaplin,  Rt.  Hon.  Henry,  216  ; 
elected  member  of  the  National 
Union,  217 

Charles,  Sir  Arthur,  Counsel  for  the 
Defence  in  the  West  of  England 
Bank  case,  173 

Charley,  Sir  W.  T.,  member  of  the 
National  Union,  97,  98 

Chartist  riot  of  1848,  13 

Chelmsford,  Frederick,   ist  Baron, 

8? 

Cheltenham,  meeting  at,  101  ;  elec- 
tion petition  case,  175 
Chester,  Harry,  30,  59 
Childers,  Rt.  Hon.  Hugh,  member 
of    the    Commission     on     Irish 
Finance,  333 

"  Church  and  its  Work,"  399 
Church  Association,  attacks  on  Sir 

E.  Clarke,  400 

Church  Defence  Institution,  397 
Church  Discipline  Bill,  399 
Churchill,  Lord  Randolph,  engage- 
ment,  107  ;    friendship  with  Sir 
E    Clarke,   107,  218  ;    candidate 
for   Woodstock,    107 ;     nervous- 


ness at  addressing  the  election 
meeting,  108  ;  seat  in  the  House 
of  Commons,  191  ;  position  in 
Parliament,  211  ;  characteristics, 
213  ;  member  of  the  Council  of 
the  National  Union,  214  ;  at  the 
Birmingham  Conference,  214; 
elected  chairman,  215;  resigna- 
tion, 216,  217  ;  Chancellor  of 
the  Exchequer,  255  ;  leader  of 
the  House  of  Commons,  263  ; 
resignation,  26  ^ 

Churchill,  Rt.  Hon.  Winston,  Life 
of  Lord  Randolph  Churchill,  214, 
217  note 

City  Commercial  School,  Lombard 
Street,  21,  68 

Clark,  Sir  Andrew,  153 

Clarke,  Sir  Andrew,  347 

Clarke,  Annie,  illness,  91,  153,  167, 
188  ;  birth  of  her  sons,  92,  94  ; 
recovery,  93  ;  birth  of  her  daugh- 
ters, 94,  114;  death  of  her 
daughter  Mabel,  154  ;  at  Hast- 
ings, 154  ;  letters  from  her  hus- 
band, 154,  161,  162,  164,  165  ; 
death,  189.  See  Mitchell 

Clarke,  Edward,  M.P.  for  Taunton,  2 

Clarke,  Sir  Edward,  2  ;  Treasurer 
of  Lincoln's  Inn,  3  ;  sketch  of 
his  life,  3 

Clarke,  Sir  Edward,  Lord  Mayor 
of  London,  4 

Clarke,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  Edward,  an- 
cestors, 2  ;  namesakes,  2-4  ; 
father,  5,  8  ;  mother,  6,  10  ; 
birth,  7  ;  childhood,  8-16  ;  home 
in  King  William  Street,  n  ;  at 
Greenwich,  13  ;  at  school  at 
Edmonton,  16-18,  20 ;  lessons 
in  shorthand,  17  ;  elocution,  17, 
23  ;  at  the  Duke  of  Wellington's 
funeral,  19  ;  friendship  with  R. 
Pottle,  21  ;  at  the  City  Commer- 
cial School,  21-24,  68  ;  recita- 
tions, 24,  68  ;  life  in  the  shop, 
25-37  ;  attends  evening  classes 
at  Crosby  Hall,  30  ;  prizes,  30, 
31  ;  essay  on  Hamlet,  31  ;  walk- 
ing tours,  31,  32,  no;  Associate 
in  Arts  of  Oxford  University, 
33  ;  at  Hampton  Court,  33  ; 
first  meeting  with  Annie  Mit- 
chell, 33  ;  wins  the  examination 
for  a  writership  in  the  India 
Office,  35  ;  influence  of  books, 
38-42  ;  play  The  Serf,  42,  70  ; 
lectures,  46,  53  ;  attends  a 
choral  society,  47  ;  work  at  the 


426 


INDEX 


India  House,  49  ;  attends  even- 
ing classes  at  King's  College,  51, 
71  ;  edits  the  Journal  of  the 
Evening  Classes  for  Young  Men, 
52  ;  contributions,  53  ;  engage- 
ment, 54  ;  gratuity  on  leaving 
the  India  House,  56  ;  examina- 
tion for  the  Tancred  studentship, 
57-59  I  elected  a  Student  of  Lin- 
coln's Inn,  59  ;  attends  lectures 
at  the  Working  Men's  College, 

59  ;  literary  work  for  newspapers, 

60  ;    study  of  rhetoric,  60  ;    at- 
tends debates  of  the  Hardwicke 
Society,    61,    90,    05  ;     study   of 
speeches  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons, 62,  90,  95;  Hon.  Secretary 
of  the  Working  Men's  Club  and 
Institute  Union,  63  ;  engagement 
broken  off,  64  ;  pupil  under  Mr. 
Bennett,  65 ;  barrister  of  Lincoln's 
Inn,  67  ;  visits  to  the  theatre,  68  ; 
theatrical  acquaintances,  70-75; 
Associate  of  King's  College,  76; 
chambers,    77  ;     at    the    Surrey 
Sessions,  78  ;   case  at  the  Central 
Criminal  Court,  80  ;    address  at 
the  "  Socials  "  debating  society, 
83  ;     reconciliation    with    Annie 
Mitchell,  84  ;   ceases  to  be  on  the 
staff  of  the  newspapers,  85  ;    ex- 
tradition ca?es,  86,  87  ;    fees,  87, 
90,  93,  114,  149,  171,  194,  259; 
book  on  extradition,   87  ;    mar- 
riage,    88  ;      at    Hastings,     89  ; 
home  at  Gloucester  Cottages,  89  ; 
life  of  economy,   90  ;    illness  of 
his   wife,    91,    153  ;     insures   his 
life,  93  ;  member  of  the  National 
Union,  97,  98,  217  ;   first  political 
speech  at  York,  99  ;    lectures  on 
the  Irish  Church  Establishment, 
100  ;    at  Cheltenham,  101  ;    Car- 
diff,   101,    109;     Swansea,    101  ; 
declines  to  stand  for  Hackney, 
102  ;   election  petition  cases,  102, 
174-184,  407  ;    Chairman  of  the 
Lambeth   Conservative   Associa- 
tion,   103,    106 ;     at   the   Dover 
election/  104;     at    Woodstock, 
107  ;     Bath,    1 08  ;     Freemason, 
110  ;    Master  of  the  Caledonian 
Lodge,    in  ;    Past  Grand  War- 
den,   112;    Master  of  "Sir  Ed- 
ward Clarke"  Lodge,  112  ;  home 
at  Dagmar  Villa,  113;    death  of 
his    brother,     118;      moves    to 
Huntingdon   Lodge,    118  ;     can- 
didate for  Southwark,  119,  149, 


169  ;  the  Penge  case,  120-134  ; 
peroration  of  his  speech,  129  ; 
interview  with  Louis  Staunton, 
134  ;  the  Great  Turf  Fraud  case, 
136-148  ;  method  of  cross-ex- 
amination, 144  ;  refuses  the 
offer  of  Counsel  to  the  Treasury, 
152  ;  illness  of  his  mother,  153  ; 
death  of  his  daughter,  154  ; 
address  to  the  Electors  of  South- 
wark, 157-161  ;  M.P.  for  South- 
wark, 163  ;  reception  in  the 
House  of  Commons,  164  ;  enter- 
tained by  Lord  Beaconsfield, 
165  ;  on  Local  Option,  167 ; 
illness,  169,  245,  365,  387  ;  loses 
his  seat,  170  ;  Q.C.,  171  ;  Counsel 
for  the  Defence  in  the  West  of 
England  Bank  case,  173  ;  candi- 
date for  Plymouth,  184,  244  ; 
M.P.,  186,  245,  255,  256,  300, 
316  ;  death  of  his  wife,  189 ; 
rooms  at  Belgrave  Mansions,  189  ; 
in  Switzerland,  189  ;  at  the  New- 
castle meeting,  190  ;  proposal  to 
carry  on  Bills,  192,  204,  288  ; 
case  of  Esther  Pay,  194  ;  second 
marriage,  195  ;  political  speeches 
in  the  north  of  England,  196  ; 
at  Plymouth,  196,  270 ;  death 
of  his  mother,  197  ;  house  in 
Russell  Square,  197-199 ;  gives 
up  smoking,  199  ;  fondness  for 
boating,  200  ;  purchases  Thorn- 
cote,  20 1  ;  builds  St.  Peter's 
Church,  202  ;  clauses  on  the 
Corrupt  Practices  Bill,  2-07  ;  at 
Aston  Park,  218  ;  controversy 
on  finance  with  Mr.  Gladstone, 
219-224;  atPynes,  224;  amend- 
ment to  the  Address,  225;  memor- 
andums on  the  Franchise  Bill, 
227-230 ;  on  the  principle  of 
Proportional  Representation,  2  32; 
on  the  Deceased  Wife's  Sister  Bill, 
233.  397  ;  tour  in  Belgium,  235  ; 
criticism  on  J.  Morley's  amend- 
ment, 237  ;  exclusion  from  office, 
242  ;  retires  from  the  National 
Union,  243  ;  the  Bartlett  case, 
246-253  ;  appointed  Solicitor- 
General,  255  ;  entertained  at  the 
Guildhall,  Plymouth,  256;  speech, 
257-259,  291-293  ;  relations  with 
his  colleague,  Sir  R.  Webster, 
259  ;  hours  of  work,  262  ;  on 
the  charge  against  The  Times, 
268 ;  views  on  the  Channel 
Tunnel,  271  ;  President  of  the 


INDEX 


427 


Birmingham  Law  Students'  So- 
ciety, 272  ;  "  The  Future  of  the 
Legal  Profession,"  272  ;  Counsel 
in  the  trial  against  Lord  Salis- 
bury, 277-279 ;  declines  brief 
for  The  Times  case,  282  ;  Parnell 
divorce  case,  283-286,  289  ;  case 
of  Sir  W.  Gordon-Gumming, 
295-298  ;  opinion  of  the  Salva- 
tion Army,  299  ;  caricature  in 
Punch,  299  ;  on  disestablishment 
of  the  Church  in  Wales,  299  ; 
franchise  and  registration  reform, 
299 ;  visit  to  Ireland,  302  ; 
witnesses  the  procession  to  Glas- 
nevin  Cemetery,  302-304  ;  im- 
pressions of  the  Irish,  305  ;  on 
the  Home  Rule  Bill,  309  ;  the 
duty  of  the  House  of  Commons, 
310  ;  amendment  on  the  "  Period 
of  Qualifications  and  Elections 
Bill,"  312  ;  declines  Solicitor- 
Generalship,  317  ;  tour  in  Italy, 
318,  365  ;  on  the  controversy 
with  the  United  States,  321  ;  the 
Jameson  Raid  case,  323-329 ; 
case  of  Messrs.  Werriher,  Beit  & 
Co.,  329-331  ;  on  adjustment  of 
Irish  grievances,  334,  335  ;  de- 
clines Mastership  of  the  Rolls, 
336  ;  tours  in  Russia,  341,  346  ; 
War  for  Commerce,  344  ;  letter 
to  The  Times,  348  ;  offers  to  re- 
sign his  seat,  350 ;  protest  against 
war  with  South  Africa,  351-353, 
355  ;  loyalty  to  his  party,  357  ; 
resigns  his  seat,  360,  362  ;  applies 
for  the  Chiltern  Hundreds,  362, 
389  ;  marriage  of  his  daughter, 
364 ;  at  Rome,  365  ;  tour  in 
Egypt,  365  ;  trip  to  Canada,  366- 

371  ;      candidate    for    Brighton, 

372  ;  trip  to  the  Mediterranean, 
374  ;    candidate  for  the  City  of 
London,  376  ;    M.P.,  377  ;    rela- 
tions with   A.    J.   Balfour,    380, 
388  ;     views   against   Tariff   Re- 
form, 384  ;    on  the  creed  of  the 
Tory  party,  385  ;    trip  to  Cairo, 
387  ;    resigns  his  seat,  389  ;    at 
Jersey,     390 ;       meditation     at 
Thorncote,    391-395  ;     pictures, 
392-394  ;    Treasurer  of  Lincoln's 
Inn,    396 ;     religious    principles, 
397  ;   address  at  the  Albert  Hall 
on  "  The  Church  and  its  Work," 
399  ;   member  of  the  Commission 
on  Ecclesiastical  Discipline,  401- 
403  ;    President  of  the  National 


Church  League,  403  ;  trip  to 
South  Africa,  403  ;  book  on  short- 
hand, 404  ;  Swifthand  :  a  New 
Simple  and  Rapid  Method  of  Writ- 
ing, 405  ;  emendation  of  the 
Epistles,  406 ;  appointed  Privy 
Councillor,  407  ;  sworn  in,  408  ; 
financial  loss,  409  ;  leaves  Thorn- 
cote,  410  ;  builds  a  small  house, 
410;  library,  411;  farewell 
dinner  at  Lincoln's  Inn  Hall,  413  ; 
speech,  414-419 

Clarke,  Ethel,  birth,  114  ;  at  school 
in  Folkestone,  200 ;  marriage, 
363.  See  Rees-Webbe 

Clarke,  Frances,  birth  of  her  daugh- 
ters, 6  ;  son,  7  ;  character,  10  ; 
religious  views,  10  ;  criticism  on 
her  son  Edward's  delivery  of  his 
lectures,  46  ;  illness,  153  ;  death, 
197 

Clarke,  Frances,  6,  12  ;  takes 
charge  of  her  brother's  house,  189 

Clarke,  George,  4 

Clarke,  George,  senior  officer  at 
Scotland  Yard,  138  ;  case  against, 
138-147  ;  acquitted,  147 

Clarke,  H.  R.,  evidence  at  the 
Turf  Fraud  case,  142 

Clarke,  Joseph,  35;  illness,  114; 
distinguished  career  at  school, 
114;  characteristics,  115,  117; 
received  into  the  Church  of  Rome, 

115  ;  at  Broad  way,  116  ;  Dublin, 

116  ;   released  from  his  monastic 
vows,  117  ;    various  occupations, 

117  ;   illness,  117  ;    death,  118 
Clarke,    Kathleen,    Lady,    wedding 

tour,  196  ;  at  Plymouth,  197  ; 
Russell  Square,  1 97  ;  birth  of  her 
sons,  200  ;  delicate  health,  200  ; 
lays  the  foundation-stone  of  St. 
Peter's  Church,  203  ;  tour  in 
Belgium,  235  ;  attack  of  typhoid 
fever,  235 ;  at  Staines,  280 ; 
letters  from  her  husband.  280, 
281  ;  tour  in  Italy,  318  ;  Russia, 
346  ;  at  Sherborne  Castle,  348  ; 
trip  to  Cairo,  387 ;  attack  of 
tonsilitis,  387  ;  present  at  the 
farewell  dinner  to  her  husband, 
414.  See  Bryant 

Clarke,  Mabel,  94,  114  ;  illness  and 
death,  154 

Clarke,  Margaretta,  6,  12 

Clarke,  Mr.,  apprenticed  to  a 
silversmith,  5  ;  marriage,  6 ; 
jeweller's  shop,  6 ;  characteris- 
tics, 8  .9 ;  conservatism,  9 ;  in- 


428 


INDEX 


come,  ii  ;  moves  from  King 
William  Street  to  Moorgate  Street, 
35  ;  wedding  gift  to  his  son  Ed- 
ward, 89 ;  congratulations  to 
him,  164  ;  lives  with  him,  189 
Clarke,  Percival,  birth,  94  ;  at 
school  in  Hastings,  200  ;  at  Eton 
and  Trinity  Hall,  201  ;  visit  to 
Ireland,  302  ;  tour  in  the  nor- 
thern capitals,  341  ;  Canada, 
366  ;  at  the  farewell  dinner  to 
his  father,  414 

Clarke,   William,   birth,  200  ;    trip 
to  Cairo,   387  ;    at  the  farewell 
dinner  to  his  father,  414 
Cleveland,  Dowager  Duchess  of,  347 
Cleveland,    President,    Commission 
on    the    British    Guiana    Boun- 
daries, 319-323 
Clifton,  Bishop  of,  116 
Cobden  Club,  manifesto,  343 
Cockburn,    Alexander,    Lord   Chief 
Justice,    1 8,    83,    85  ;     praise   of 
Sir  E.  Clarke,  86  ;    West  of  Eng- 
land Bank  case,  173 
Colchester,   election  petition  case, 

J74 

Colenso,  battle-field  of,  404 

Coleridge,  Lady,  296 

Coleridge,  Lord,  The  Times  case, 
273  ;  case  of  Sir  W.  Gordon- 
Gumming,  296 ;  summing-up, 
297 

Coleridge,  W.  H.,  founder  of  the 
"  City  Press,"  52 

Collins,  Arthur,  Counsel  for  the 
Prosecution  in  the  West  of  Eng- 
land Bank  case,  173  ;  election 
petition  case  at  Plymouth,  183 

Collins,  Wilkie,  40 

Comberbatch,  Father,  influence  on 
Joseph  Clarke,  115 

Commons,  House  of,  dynamite  ex- 
plosions, 236  ;  scene  in,  281 

Connaught,  H.R.H.  Duke  of,  Grand 
Master  of  the  Freemasons,  112 

Conservative  Associations,  meet- 
ings, 97,  99 

Conservative  Union,  organisation, 
96-98 

Cooks'  Company,  8,  9  note 

Cookson,  Montague,  K.C.,  attends 
the  debates  of  the  Hardwicke 
Society,  61 

Coppin,  Charles,  case  of,  87 

Cordite,  supply  of,  314 

Cornhill  Magazine,  120  note,  136 
note,  194  note 

Coromandel,  the,  318 


Corrupt  Practices  Bill,  206 

Corry,  Montagu,  65.     See  Rowton 

Courtney,  Leonard,  ist  Baron,  at- 
tends the  debates  of  the  Hard- 
wicke Society,  61  ;  at  the  fare- 
well dinner  to  Sir  E.  Clarke,  414 

Coward,  Lewis,  175,  283 

Co  wen,  Joseph,  190 

Cozens-Hardy,  Lord,  Master  of  the 
Rolls,  408 

Craig,  Norman,  330 

Crawford,  Sir  Homewood,  177,  340 

Crawford,  Mrs.,  divorce  case,  260 

Creswick,  William,  42,  70 

Crimes  Act,  239,  265,  270 

Criminal  Evidence  Act  of  1898, 
27  note,  339 

Crocodile,  H.M.S.,  13 

Crosby  Hall,  evening  classes  for 
young  men,  29  ;  lectures,  46  ; 
debating  society,  53  ;  elocution- 
ary entertainment,  53 

Cr os well,  Mr.,  5 

Crystal  Palace,  90,  98 

Currie,  Bertram,  member  of  the 
Commission  on  Irish  Finance,  333 

Currie,  Raikes,  45 

Curzon,  George,  ist  Earl,  375 

Dagmar  Villa,  113 

Darling,  Mr.  Justice,  413 

Davis,  Charles,  50 

Day,  Sir  John,  175,  285  ;  Counsel 
for  the  Defence  in  the  West  of 
England  Bank  case,  173  ;  on 
Parnell  Commission,  284 

Day,  Mr.,  consultation  with  Sir  E. 
Clarke  on  the  Parnell  divorce 
case,  284 

Day,  S.  H.,  Counsel  for  the  Defence 
in  the  West  of  England  Bank 
case,  173 

Deane,  Sir  Bar  grave,  335 

Death  Duties  Bill,  312 

Debt,  National,  reduction,  294 

Deceased  Wife's  Sister  Bill,  232,  397 

Delagoa  Bay  Railway,  opening,  323 

Denison,  Colonel,  370 

Detectives,  case  against,  137  ;  trial, 
138-148 

Dibdin,  Sir  Lewis,  401 

Dickens,  Charles,  40  ;  at  the  Ad- 
ministrative Reform  Association 
meeting,  44 

Dickens,  Henry,  at  the  farewell 
dinner  to  Sir  E.  Clarke,  414 

Digby,  Wingfield,  348 

Dilke,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  Charles,  ad- 
mitted to  office,  211  ;  member 


INDEX 


429 


of  the  Cabinet,  212  ;  divorce 
case,  260 ;  Redistribution  Bill, 
312  ;  characteristics,  313 

Dillon,  John,  against  the  proposal 
to  carry  on  Bills,  288 

Dillwyn,  Mr.,  288 

Dimsdale,    Rt.    Hon.    Sir    Joseph, 

364>  374 

Disraeli,  Rt.  Hon.  Benjamin,  18  ; 
political  novels,  39  ;  Coningsby, 
42  ;  Sybil,  42  ;  principles  of  his 
political  faith,  96  ,  on  the  rights 
of  the  working  class,  98  ;  Reform 
Bill  of  1867,  100,  312  ;  refuses 
to  form  an  administration,  103  ; 
generosity,  in.  See  Beaconsfield 

Dolgelly,  no 

Don  Pacifico,  debate  on,  18 

Donkin,  Professor,  33 

Doughty,  Sir  George,  trip  to  Can- 
ada, 367 

Dover,  election,  104 

Druscovich,  Chief  Inspector,  137  ; 
case  against,  137-147;  verdict, 

147 

Dublin,  302 

Duff,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  R.  W.,  on  the 
defeat  of  the  Ministry,  240 

Duke,  Rt.  Hon.  Henry  E.,  406 ; 
career,  196  ;  character,  196  ;  at 
the  farewell  dinner  to  Sir  E. 
Clarke,  414 

Dunn,  Andrew,  candidate  for  South- 
war  k,  156 

Durban,  404 

Dyke,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  William  Hart, 
private  secretary  to  Lord  Beacons- 
field,  165 

Dynamite  explosions,  236 

Dyson,  Rev.  George,  relations  with 
A.  Bartlett,  247  ;  accused  of 
murder,  249  ;  verdict,  250 

Eady,  Frank,  7  note 

Eastbourne,  31 

Ecclesiastical     Discipline,      Royal 

Commission  on,  396,  401-403 
Edmonton,  school  at,  16 
Education,  Free,  established,  294 
Edward  VII,  King,  installed  Grand 

Master  of  Masons,  in 
Egypt,  365 

Election,  General,  in  1874,  105 
Election  petition  cases,  174-184 
Electors,  increase  in  the  number, 

192 

Eliot,  George,  40 
Ellenborough,  Edward,  ist  Earl  of. 

Governor- General  of  India,  48 


Employers'  Liability  Bill,  270,  338 
English  Church  Union,  397 
Esher,  William,  ist  Baron,  330,  336 
Evans,  Sir  David,  374,  380 
Evesham  election  petition  case,  176 
Examiner,  The,  62 
Extradition,  editions  of,  87 

Farren,  Nellie,  72 

Farrer,  Thomas,  ist  Baron,  mem- 
ber of  the  Commission  on  Irish 
Finance,  333 

Farwell,  Mr.  Justice,  391 

Faust,  performance  of,  253 

Fawcett,  Rt.  Hon.  Henry,  Post- 
master-General, 221 

Fenn,  Thomas,  in 

Fergusson,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  James, 
mission  to  Lisbon,  263 

Ferrier,  Dr.,  389 

Ferrieres,  Baron  de,  election  peti- 
tion case,  176 

Fielding,  Mr.,  369 

Finance  Bill,  313 

Financial  Reform  Almanack,  219 

Finlaison,  William,  The  Times  re- 
porter, 86 

Finlay,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  Robert,  327  ; 
appointed  Solicitor-General,  318  ; 
characteristics,  318  ;  at  the  fare- 
well dinner  to  Sir  E.  Clarke, 
414 

Fitzgerald,  Penrose,  314;  on  the 
proposal  to  carry  on  Bills,  288 

Fitzpatrick,  Mr.,  368 

Foote,  Lydia,  74 

Forsyth,  William,  Hortensius,  356  ; 
epigram,  357 

Fortnightly  Review,  211  note 

Forwood,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  Arthur, 
elected  member  of  the  National 
Union,  217  ;  scheme  for  the  in- 
crease of  the  shipwrights'  wages, 
300 

Foster,  Peter  Le  Neve,  30 

Franchise  Bill,  224,  226 

Franchise  Reform,  299,  300 

Fraser's  Magazine,  191  note 

Freemasonry,  character  of  the 
teaching,  113 

Fremantle,  Admiral,  instructions, 
263 

Frere,  Bartle,  clerk  to  the  Tancred 
Trustees,  57 

Friswell,  J.  Hain,  72  ;  A  Pair  of 
Gloves,  27 

Froggatt,  Edward,  case  against, 
138-147 

Froude,  James  A.,  40 


430 


INDEX 


Furness,    Sir   Christopher,    election 

petition  case,  407 
Furniss,  Harry,  caricature  of  Sir  E. 

Clarke,  299 
Fur ni vail,  F.  J.,  42    • 

Gardner,  Biscombe,  portrait  of  Lord 
Beaconsfield,  412 

Gaskell,  Mrs.,  40 ;  Sylvia's  Lovers,  64 

George,  Frances,  marriage,  6  ;  ap- 
pearance, 6.  See  Clarke 

George,  Henry,  10 

Gervis,  Dr.  Henry,  91  ;  attends 
Mrs.  E.  Clarke,  91 

Gibbs,  Alban,  375  ;  candidate  for 
the  City  of  London,  376  ;  elec- 
tion, 377  ;  vacates  his  seat,  380. 
See  Aldenham 

Giffard,  Sir  Hardinge,  characteris- 
tics, 82  ;  advice  to  Sir  E.  Clarke, 
83,  416  ;  candidate  for  Cardiff, 
109 ;  marriage,  109 ;  Solicitor- 
General,  126  ;  Counsel  for  the 
Prosecution  in  the  West  of  Eng- 
land Bank  case,  173.  See  Hals- 
bury 

Giff  en,  Sir  Robert,  evidence  on  Irish 
finance,  333 

Gill,  Charles  F.,  295,  328 

Gladstone,  Rt.  Hon.  Herbert,  op- 
position to  the  London  Govern- 
ment Act,  340 

Gladstone,  Rt.  Hon.  W.  E.,  18  ; 
on  the  Parliamentary  Franchise, 
82  ;  opinion  of  H.  C.  Raikes,  95  ; 
defeat  of  his  Ministry,  103,  240  ; 
difficulty  of  his  seat  for  Green- 
wich, 105  ;  vote  of  thanks  to 
H.M.  Forces  in  Egypt,  205  ; 
relations  with  J.  Chamberlain, 
211,  212  ;  disapproval  of  his 
speeches,  213  ;  financial  state- 
ment, 219-221  ;  letter  to  Sir  E. 
Clarke,  221  ;  memorandum,  222  ; 
meetings  on  the  Franchise  Bill, 
226  ;  on  the  Crimes  Act,  239  ; 
return  to  office,  246  ;  conversion 
to  the  Channel  Tunnel  project, 
271  ;  treatment  of  Parnell,  275  ; 
opinion  of  him,  277  ;  Tithes  Bill, 
280  ;  attack  on  the  proposal  to 
carry  on  Bills,  288  ;  Home  Rule 
Bill,  309  ;  defection  on  the  Welsh 
Church  Bill,  314 

Gladstone,  W.  H.,  95 

Glasnevin  Cemetery,  procession  to, 
302-304 

Glenesk,  Algernon,  ist  Baron,  176. 
See  Borthwick 


Glengarriff,  302 

Gloucester  Cottages,  89 

Gordon,  General,  death  at  Khar- 
toum, 236 

Gordon-Cumming,  Sir  William,  case, 
295-298 

Gorst,  Harold,  The  Fourth  Party, 
extract  from,  215,  217  note 

Gorst,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  John  Eldon, 
M.P.  for  Cambridge,  96  ;  appear- 
ance and  characteristics,  96  ; 
member  of  the  National  Union, 
97,  217  ;  elected  Vice- President, 
98  ;  appointed  Solicitor-General, 
242 

Graham,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  James,  18 

Gravesend,    election  petition  case, 

175-177 

Great  Britain,  controversy  with  the 
United  States,  319-323  ;   dispute 
with  Venezuela,    319  ;     financial 
relations  with  Ireland,  332  ;    re- 
port of  commissioners,  333  ;  rela- 
tions with  Russia,  341 
Greenwich,  13 
Greet,  Captain,  13 
Grey  de  Wilton,  Lord,  108 
Grosvenor,  Lord  Richard,  239 
Guest,    Ivor,    candidate    for    Ply- 
mouth, 359.     See  Wimborne 
Guide  to  English  History,  A,  36 
Gully,    W.    C.,    case  against   Lord 

Salisbury,  279.    See  Selby 
Gye,  Percy,  122,  126 


Hackett,  Miss,  29 
Hackney,  meeting  at,  102 
Hague,  The,  conference  at,  342 
Haldane,  Richard,  ist  Viscount,  at 

the   farewell    dinner    to    Sir    E. 

Clarke,  413 
Halnaby,  196 
Halsbury,  Hardinge,  ist  Earl  of, 

Lord  Chancellor,   241,    315 ;     at 

the    farewell    dinner    to    Sir    E. 

Clarke,  414.  See  Giffard 
Hamber,  Capt.  Thomas,  60 
Hamilton,  Lord  Claud,  216 
Hamilton,  Sir  Edward,  evidence 

on  Irish  finance,  333 
Hamilton,  Rt.  Hon.  Lord  George, 

166,  225,  371  ;    on  the  increase 

of  the  shipwrights'  wages,  300 
Hamilton,  Lady,  no 
Hamlet,  essay  on,  31 
Hampton  Court,  33 
Hansard,  extract  from,  232 
Hanson,  Sir  Reginald,  364,  374 


INDEX 


431 


Harcourt,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  William, 
212  ;  at  the  Round  Table  Con- 
ference, 264  ;  treatment  of  Par- 
nell,  275  ;  at  the  National  Liberal 
Club,  287  ;  against  the  proposal 
to  carry  on  Bills,  288  ;  Chancellor 
of  the  Exchequer,  312  ;  Local 
Veto  Bill,  312  ;  Death  Duties 
Bill,  313  ;  relations  with  his  col- 
leagues, 314 

Hardwicke  Society,  debates,  61, 
95  ;  dinner  at,  366 

Hardy,  Hon.  A.  E.  Gathorne,  elec- 
tion petition  case,  177 

Harms-worth,  Alfred,  letter  to  The 
Evening  News,  358.  See  North- 
cliffe 

Harrison,  Charles,  death,  359 

Harrison,  Frederic,  attends  the  de- 
bates of  the  Hardwicke  Society, 
61 

Hartington,  Marquis  of,  167  ;  at 
Plymouth,  254  ;  offer  from  Lord 
Salisbury,  263  ;  relations  with 
J.  Chamberlain,  264  ;  on  the 
proposal  to  carry  on  Bills,  288 

Hartlepool  election  petition  case, 
407 

Harvey,  W.  C.,  member  of  the 
National  Union,  97,  98 

Hastings,  31,  89,  92,  163,  245  ; 
election,  245 

Hawker,  W.  H.,  197 

Hawkesley,  Bourchier,  323,  330 

Hawkins,  Sir  Henry,  the  Penge  case, 
126  ;  bias,  128  ;  summing-up, 
130 ;  pronounces  the  sentence 
of  death,  133  ;  retires,  135  ;  the 
Jameson  Raid  case,  327 

Hay,  Claude,  375 

Hay,  Sir  John,  166 

Henniker,  John,  5th  Baron,  216 

Henry  VIII,  revival  of,  69 

Herbert,  Hon.  Sir  Robert  Wynd- 
ham,  career,  347 

Herbert,  Sidney,  18 

Herschell,  Farrer,  ist  Baron,  Coun- 
sel for  the  Defence  in  the  West 
of  England  Bank  case,  173  ; 
Solicitor-General,  210 

Hersee,  Rose,  90 

Hicks-Beach,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  Michael, 
elected  member  of  the  National 
Union,  217;  Chairman,  217; 
Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer, 
334  ;  relations  with  Sir  E.  Clarke, 

335 
Hicks-Beach,  W.  F.,  at  a  meeting 

against  Tariff  Reform,  382 


Holker,  Sir  John,  Attorney- General, 
126 ;  characteristics,  127  ;  the 
Great  Turf  Fraud  case,  138,  146  ; 
offers  to  appoint  Sir  E.  Clarke 
Counsel  to  the  Treasury,  152  ; 
appoints  A.  L.  Smith,  153  ;  Coun- 
sel for  the  Prosecution  in  the 
West  of  England  Bank  case,  173 

Holmesdale,  Viscount,  Chairman  of 
the  Council  of  the  National  Union, 
98 

Home  Rule  Bill,  the  first,  246  ; 
rejected,  254  ;  the  second,  308- 

3ii 

Hood,  Thomas,  39 
Houldsworth,  William,  216 
Howard,    Morgan,    79,    106 ;     pre- 
parations  to    contest    Lambeth, 
103 

Howard,  Thomas  Ross,  31,  33,  37 
Howard,  William  George,  120 
Hubbard,  Hon.  Evelyn,  candidate 

for  Plymouth,  316 
Huddleston,  Baron,  the  Great  Turf 

Fraud  case,  136 
Hughes,  Tom,  42 
Hulse,  Sir  Edward,  296 
Hunter,  Dr.,  against  the  proposal 

to  carry  on  Bills,  288 
Huntingdon  Lodge,  118 
Hurstmonceux,  31 

Imperial  Review,  The,  97 

India  House,  work  of  the,  49  ; 
removal  to  Whitehall,  55  ;  re- 
organisation of  the  staff,  55 

India  Office,  examination  for  writer- 
ships,  35  ;  number  of  candidates, 

Ireland,  Home  Rule  Bills,  246,  265, 
308  ;  plan  of  National  Councils, 
264  ;  Crimes  Act,  265,  270  ;  re- 
storation of  peace  and  order,  270  ; 
Act  of  1 88 1  amended,  270  ;  im- 
pressions of  the  people,  305  ; 
financial  relations  with  Great 
Britain,  332  ;  report  of  Com- 
missioners,,: 333  ;  Local  Govern- 
ment Bill,  335,  338 

Irish  Church  ^Establishment,  100 

Irish  University  Bill,  103 

Irving,  Sir  Henry,  24,  68,  72,  195, 

253 

Isaacs,  Rufus,  330,  406.  See  Read- 
ing 

Italy,  318,  365 

Ixion,  burlesque  of,  74 

James,  Edward,  &6 


432 


INDEX 


James,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  Henry,  86, 
282  ;  Counsel  for  the  Defence  in 
the  West  of  England  Bank  case, 
173  ;  Corrupt  Practices  Bill,  206  ; 
characteristics,  206  ;  refuses  the 
Woolsack,  246 

Jameson,  Dr.,  raid,  323-326 ;  in 
command  of  the  forces,  324  ; 
surrenders,  326  ;  character,  327  ; 
trial,  327-329  ;  Premier  of  Cape 
Colony,  403  ;  entertains  Sir  E. 
Clarke,  403 

Jelf,  Mr.  Justice,  330 

Jenner,  Sir  William,  133  ;  pre- 
scribes for  Sir  E.  Clarke,  169 ; 
advice  to  him,  199 

Jennings,  Louis,  97  ;  on  the  proposal 
to  carry  on  Bills,  288 

[  erome,  Miss,  engagement,  107 

Jersey,  390 

Jessel,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  George,  104 

Jessopp,  Miss,  84 

Jeune,  Sir  Francis,  candidate  for 
Colchester,  174.  See  St.  Helier 

Johannesburg,  403 ;  insurrection, 
325 

Johnson,  William,  no;  secretary 
of  the  Caledonian  MasonicLodge, 
no 

Johnstone,  Butler,  candidate  for 
Canterbury,  177 

Johnstone,  James,  60 

Jones,  Trevor,  201 

Journal  of  the  Evening  Classes,  42, 

52 
Julius  Casar,  performance  of,  70 


Karslake,  Sir  John,  86 

Kean,  Charles,  68,  69 

Kean,  Mrs.  Charles,  69 

Keats,  John,  39 

Kelly,  Sir  Fitzroy,  66 

Kennaway,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  John,  at 

a  meeting  against  Tariff  Reform, 

382 

Kentish  Mercury,  The  150 
Kiel  Canal,  341 
Killarney,  302 
Kilmainham,  Treaty  of,  286 
Kimberley,  403  ;    mine,  403 
King  Alfred,  burlesque,  73 
King,   Sir  Seymour,  at  a  meeting 

against  Tariff  Reform,  382 
King  William  Street,  shop  at,   n, 

25 

King-Harman,  -Colonel,  elected 
member  of  the  National  Union, 
217 


King's  College,  evening  classes,  51, 

71 

Kingsley,  Charles,  40 
Kingston,  34 
Kitson,  Sir  James,  motion  against 

Tariff  Reform,  381,  386 
Knutsford,    Henry,    ist   Baron,    at 

the  debate   on  the   Home  Rule 

Bill,  309 

Knowles,  James,  223 
Kruger,  President,  323  ;    telegram 

from  the  German  Emperor,  326  ; 

ultimatum,   354 

Krugersdorp,  engagement  at,  326 
Kurr,    William,     139;     fraudulent 

career,     140 ;      the    Great    Turf 

Fraud  trial,   140-147 

Labouchere,   Henry,  237  ;    against 

the  proposal  to  carry  on  Bills, 

288 

Ladysmith,  404 
Lamb,  Charles,  49 
Lambton,  Mr.,  at  a  meeting  against 

Tariff  Reform,  382 
Land  Purchase  Bill,  Irish,  288,  294 
"  Last  of  the  Barons, "lecture  on,  53 
Laurie,  Colonel,  177 
Laurier,  Sir  Wilfrid,  368 
Law  Guarantee  Society,  409 
Lawson,    Sir    Wilfrid,    Local   Veto 

Bill,  r.66 
Layard,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  Austen  Henry, 

44 
Learmouth,  Colonel,  candidate  for 

Colchester,  174 
"  Legal  Profession,  The  Future  of 

the,"  272 
Leigh,  Hon.  E.  Chandos,  Counsel 

to  the  Speaker,  65,  175 
Leonard,  J.  L.,  403 
Letchworth,    Sir    Edward,    Grand 

Secretary  of  the  Freemasons,  112 
Lewes,  194 
Lewis,  Sir  Charles,  charge  against 

The  Times,  267 
Lewis,  George,  138,  295 
Life  for  Life,  performance  of,  72 
Lilley,  Rev.  Isaac,  78 
Lilley,  Samuel,  characteristics,  78 
Lincoln's  Inn,  history  of,  47  ;   fare- 
well dinner  to  Sir  E.  Clarke,  413 
Lindley,     Mr.     Justice,     appointed 

Master  of  the  Rolls,  337 
Lindsay,  W.  S.,  26 
"  Lineal  Alphabet  or  Character  of 

Dashes,"  405 
Linton,  Mrs.  Lynn,  72 
Littler,  Ralph,  Counsel  for  the  De- 


INDEX 


433 


fence  in  the*  West  of  England 
Bank  case,  173 

Liverpool,  Robert,  2nd  Earl  of,  5 

Lloyd,  Dr.,  16 

Local  Government  Bill,  270  ;  Irish, 
335,  338 

Local  Veto  Bill,  166,  312 

Loch,  Lord,  at  the  opening  of  the 
Delagoa  Bay  Railway,  323 

Locke,  John,  M.P.  for  Southwark, 
103  ;  death,  155 

Lockwood,  Sir  Frank,  175,  233,  249, 
289,  328 

Loder,  Gerald,  candidate  for  Brigh- 
ton, 372 

London  Government  Act  1899,  340 

London,  Tower  of,  dynamite  ex- 
plosions, 236 

Lopes,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  Massey,  352 

Loreburn,  Robert,  ist  Earl,  207 

Lowther,  Rt.  Hon.  James,  218,  226 

Lucy,  Sir  Henry,  339 

Ludlow,  J.  M.,  42 

Lugard,  Lady,  325 

Lush,  Mr.  Justice,  80 

Lushington,  Godfrey  and  Vernon, 
42  ;  attend  the  debates  of  the 
Hardwicke  Society,  61 

Lusitania,  the,  341 

Lyndhurst,  John,  Baron,  speech  in 
the  House  of  Lords,  48,  416  ; 
wig,  48 

Lyttelton,  Rt.  Hon.  Alfred,  328 

Lyttelton,  Lord,  President  of  the 
Working  Men's  Club  and  Institute 
Union,  63 

Lytton,  Edward  Bulwer,  ist  Baron, 
four  styles  of  fiction,  39  ;  Kenelm 
Chillingly,  48  ;  at  the  Royal 
Literary  Fund  dinner,  269 

Lytton,  Robert,  2nd  Baron,  40 

Lyveden,  Courtenay,  3rd  Baron, 
trip  to  Canada,  366 

Macaulay,  Lord,  40 ;  History,  2 
note,  41 

Macclesfield,  election  petition  case, 
179-182 

Macdona,  Gumming,  trip  to  Can- 
ada, 367 

Machiavelli,  Nicolo,  on  the  joys  of 
a  library,  411 

Mackenzie,  Rev.  Charles,  estab- 
lishes evening  classes  for  young 
men,  29,  58 

Mackney,  E.  W.,  no 

MacMaster,  Donald,  M.P.,  368 

Macnaghten,  Lord,  408  ;  appointed 
Lord  of  Appeal,  241 


Magnus,  Sir  Philip,  at  a  meeting 

against  Tariff  Reform,  382 
Mahaffy,  Prof.,  269 
Maitland,  Lydia,  74 
MajubaHill,  defeat,  189,  351 
Malcolm,  Colonel,  on  the  proposal 

to  carry  on  Bills,  288 
Manchester,  277  ;    election,  377 
Manners,  Lord  John,  98 
Mansfield,  Canon,  186 
Maristow,  352 
Markham,     Sir     Arthur,     charges 

against    Messrs.    Wernher,    Beit 

&  Co.,  329-331 
Marsden,  George,  126 
Marston,  Henry,  69 
Marston,  Philip  Bourke,  72 
Marston,  Westland,  receptions,  71  ; 

Life  for  Life,  72 
Marten,    A.    G.,    member    of    the 

National  Union,  97,  98 
Martin,  Edward,  92 
Masterman,  John,  45 
Mathew,  J.  C.,  152 
Matthews,  Sir  Charles,  126,  249,  327 
Maxwell,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  Herbert,  281 
May,  Mr.,  letters  from  Sir  E.  Clarke, 

May  brick,  Mrs.,  case,  280 

McKellar,  Mr.,  Counsel  for  the  Pro- 
secution in  the  West  of  England 
Bank  case,  173 

McLaren,  Sir  Charles,  appointed 
Privy  Councillor,  408 

McMahon,  Patrick,  86 

Mead,  Mr.,  249 

Meiklejohn,  detective,  case  against, 
137-147  ;  verdict,  147 

Merchant  of  Venice,  burlesque  of,  73 

Merchant  Shipping,  amendment  of 
the  laws,  209 

Meredith,  George,  40 

Mersey,  John  C.,  ist  Viscount,  279 

Metropolitan  Conservative  Work- 
ing Men's  Association,  meeting, 

97 

Middleton,  Captain,  364 
Mildmay,  Mr.,  at  a  meeting  against 

Tariff  Reform,  382 
Millard,  Evelyn,  54 
Millar d,  John,  teacher  of  elocution, 

54 
Miller  and  his  Men,  performance 

of,  71 

Milner,  Sir  Alfred,  346 
Ministry,  resignation,  240  ;    defeat, 

3M 

Mitchell,  Annie,  33,  37  ;  first  meet- 
ing with  Sir  E.  Clarke,  33  ;  ap- 


434 


INDEX 


pearance,  34  ;  engagement,  54  ; 
breaks  it  off,  64  ;  reconciliation, 
84  ;  marriage,  88.  See  Clarke 

Mitchell,  Fanny,  33 

Moloney,  Mr.,  249 

Monk,  Mr.,  369 

Montreal,  368 

Morley,  Henry,  lecturer  on  English 
Literature  at  King's  College,  51, 
71  ;  appearance,  52  ;  charac- 
teristics, 52  ;  editor  of  The  Ex- 
aminer, 62 

Morley,  John,  ist  Viscount,  Life  of 
Gladstone,  extract  from,  213  ; 
amendment  on  the  policy  of  the 
Government,  237  ;  on  the  Crimes 
Act,  239  ;  at  the  Round  Table 
Conference,  264  ;  against  the 
proposal  to  carry  on  Bills,  288  ; 
Chief  Secretary  for  Ireland,  312  ; 
"  Period  of  Qualifications  and 
Elections  Bill,"  312  ;  at  the  fare- 
well dinner  to  Sir  E.  Clarke,  414 

Morning  Herald,  The,  60,  84 

Morrison,  Hans,  82 

Moscow,  342,  346 

Moulin,  Bishop  Du,  character  of 
his  sermon,  369 

Moulton,  Lord,  at  the  farewell 
dinner  to  Sir  E.  Clarke,  414 

Murrough,  John  P.,  83 

Musical  Society,  114 

Muskett,  Mr.,  employed  in  the 
Parnell  divorce  case,  285,  289 

Naples,  318 

National  Church  League,  403 
National  Union  of  Conservative  and 
Constitutional    Associations,    es- 
tablished,    98  ;       conference    at 
Birmingham,   214  ;     negotiations 
with  the  Central  Committee,  216  ; 
conference     at     Sheffield,     216 ; 
election  of  candidates,  217 
Neilson,  Adelaide,  appearance,  72 
Neilson,  Julia,  72 
Nelson,  Admiral  Lord,  no 
Nevill,  Lord,  96.    See  Abergavenny 
New  York,  371 

Newcastle,  political  meeting  at,  190 
Nicholas  II,  Emperor  of  Russia,  on 
the  limitation  of  armaments,  342 
Nicholson,  Sir  Richard,  278 
Nineteenth  Century,  The,  223 
Noel,  Gerard,  Vice- President  of  the 

National  Union,  98 
Norris,  Mr.,  Counsel  for  the  Defence 
in  the  West  of  England  Bank  case, 
173 


Northcliffe,  Alfred,  ist  Viscount, 
358.  See  Harmsworth 

Northcote,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  Henry, 
191,  225  ;  M.P.  for  Exeter,  245  ; 
appointed  Governor  of  Bombav, 
361 

Northcote,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  Stafford, 
164  ;  on  the  dissolution  of  Parlia- 
ment, 1 68  ;  Conservative  leader 
in  House  of  Commons,  190;  at 
Newcastle,  190 ;  nervousness, 
191  ;  wish  to  consult  Sir  E. 
Clarke,  192  ;  want  of  alertness, 
205  ;  at  Aston  Park,  218  ;  re- 
ceives Sir  E.  Clarke  at  Pynes, 
224  ;  negotiations  on  the  Fran- 
chise Bill,  226  ;  vote  of  censure, 
236,  238 

Norton,  Hon.  Mrs.,  39 

Norwood,  Mr.,  204 

Nottingham,  election  petition  case, 
407 

Nunn,  Joshua,  in 


Oakshott,  Mr.,  17 

Oaths  Bill,  274 

O'Brien,  William,  action  against 
Lord  Salisbury,  277-279 

O'Donnell,  Frank  Hugh,  libel  ac- 
tion against  The  Times,  272-274, 
2 77.  283  ;  History  of  the  Irish 
Parliamentary  Party,  272  note 

Olney,  Mr.,  character  of  his  dis- 
patches, 319 

O'Malley,  Sergeant,  86 

Orange  Girl,  The,  performance  of, 
70 

O'Shea,  Captain,  divorce  case,  283, 
289 

O'Shea,  Mrs.,  relations  with  Par- 
nell, 273,  283,  285  ;  divorce  case, 
289  ;  birth  of  her  children,  286 

Ottawa,  368 

Oxford  University,  Associate  in 
Arts,  examination,  33 


Paget,  Bishop  F.,  on  the  Ecclesiasti- 
cal Discipline  Commission,  401 

Pakington,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  John,  31 

Palmer,  Inspector,  case  against, 
138-147  ;  verdict,  147 

Palmerston,  Viscount,  18 

Panton,  Paul,  65 

Parliament,  dissolution,  168,  244, 
254,  300  ;  prorogued,  224,  288  ; 
adjourned,  236  ;  meeting,  354  ; 
opened,  378 


INDEX 


435 


Parliamentary  franchise  extension, 

193 

Parnell,  C.  S.,  236  ;  at  Plymouth, 
254  ;  charge  against,  265,  275  ; 
explanation,  266  ;  relations  with 
Mrs.  O'Shea,  273,  283,  285  ;  tri- 
umph in  the  House  of  Commons, 
275  ;  at  Nottingham,  276  ;  Ha- 
warden,  277  ;  receives  the  free- 
dom of  Edinburgh,  278  ;  action 
for  libel  against  The  Times,  282  ; 
divorce  case,  283,  289  ;  descrip- 
tion of  Mr.  Gladstone,  292 ; 
anniversary  of  his  death,  302 -304^ 

"  Parnellism  and  Crime,"  articles" 
on,  265,  274 

Patents  Bill,  206 

Patmore,  Coventry,  40 

Pay,  Esther,  trial  of,  194 

Payne,  Dr.,  127 

Pearce,  Sir  William,  candidate  for 
Plymouth,  301 

Pease,  Rt.  Hon.  J.  A.,  appointed 
Privy  Councillor,  408 

Peel,  Rt.  Hon.  Arthur  W.,  ist  Vis- 
count, Speaker,  237 

Peel,  Sir  Robert,  18  ;    death,  19 

Penge  mystery  case,  120-134 

Percy,  Earl,  resigns  chairmanship 
of  the  National  Union  Council, 

2I5 

"  Period  of  Qualifications  and  Elec- 
tions Bill,"  312 

Petheram,  Mr.,  Counsel  for  the  De- 
fence in  the  West  of  England 
Bank  case,  173 

Pevensey,  31 

Phelps,  Samuel,  69 

Phillips,  Sir  G.  Faudel,  340,  374 

Phillips,   Lionel,  at  Johannesburg, 

4°3 

Pinches,  Conrad,  69  ;  school  Claren- 
don House,  70 

Pinches,  Edward  Ewen,  69,  77,  168, 
189,  244 

Pinches,  William,  head  of  the  City 
Commercial  School,  22,  68  ;  ap- 
pearance, 22  ;  characteristics,  23 

Pitsani  Potlugo,  324,  325 

Pius,  Father,  116 

Plaice,  Mr.,  English  master  at 
Edmonton  school,  1 7 

Platt,  Mrs.,  death,  88 

Plymouth,  election  petition  case, 
183  ;  meetings  at,  184,  204,  207, 
219,  241,  244,  254,  270,  310,  321, 
334.  34i.  345.  349;  elections, 
186,  235,  244,  254,  256,  300,  316  ; 
increase  in  the  number  of  voters, 


193  ;    Executive  Councils,  meet- 
ings, 352,  353 

Poland,  Mr.,  126,  249  ;  at  the  fare- 
well dinner  to  Sir  E.  Clarke,  414 

Pollock,  Baron,  summing-up  at  the 
Great  Turf  Fraud  trial,  147  ;  case 
of  Esther  Pay,  194  ;  the  Jameson 
Raid  case,  327 

Ponsonby,  Sir  Henry,  213 

Poole,  Arthur,  Counsel  for  the  De- 
fence in  the  West  of  England 
Bank  case,  173 

Portugal,  war  with  England 
averted,  262 

Postcards,  reply,  issue  of,  205 

Pottle,  Robert,  37  ;  friendship  with 
Sir  E.  Clarke,  21 

Powell,  Sir  Douglas,  387,  389 

Powell,  Sir  Francis,  at  a  meeting 
against  Tariff  Reform,  382 

Pretoria,  403 

Princess's  Theatre,  68 

Proportional  Representation  princi- 
ple, 232 

Prynne,  Edward,  designs  stained- 
glass  windows,  203 

Prynne,  George  Fellowes,  designs 
St.  Peter's  Church,  Staines,  202 

Prynne,  Rev.  G.  R.,  support  of  Sir 
E.  Clarke's  political  views,  232 

Public  Speeches,  extracts  from,  276, 
304,  305,  311,  322,  334,  339,  342 

Puleston,  Sir  John,  364,  375,  387 

Punch,  caricature  of  Sir  E.  Clarke, 
299 

Purcell,  H.  F.,  126 

Quain,  Sir  Richard,  245 

Raikes,  Rt.  Hon.  Henry  Cecil,  ap- 
pearance, 95,  96  ;  contests  elec- 
tions, 95  ;  characteristics,  96  ; 
organisation  of  the  Conservative 
Union,  96  ;  elected  Vice- Presi- 
dent of  the  National  Union,  98 

Railway  and  Canal  Traffic  Bill,  270 

Rainbow  Tavern,  meeting  of  the 
"  Socials  "  debating  society,  82 

Ratcliffe,  Mr.,  election  petition  case, 
176 

Rathmore,  David,  ist  Baron,  at  the 
farewell  dinner  to  Sir  E.  Clarke, 
414 

Raynham,  Miss,  74 

Reade,  Charles,  40,  133 

Reading,  Earl,  at  the  fare  well  dinner 
to  Sir  E.  Clarke,  414.  See  Isaacs 

Redistribution  Bill,  224,  312  ;  pub- 
lication of  the  Cabinet  draft,  231 


436 


INDEX 


Redmond,  John,  320 

Rees-Webbe,  Ethel,  363  ;  present 
at  the  farewell  dinner  to  her 
father,  414.  See  Clarke 

Rees-Webbe,  Capt.  Norman,  takes 
part  in  the  Boer  War,  363  ;  trip 
to  South  Africa,  403  ;  at  the 
farewell  dinner  to  his  father-in- 
law,  414 

Reform  Bill  of  1867,  98,  100,  312 

Registration  of  Voters  Bill,  192  ; 
report  on  the  system,  299 

Reid,  Rt.  Hon.  Robert,  character, 
207.  See  Loreburn 

Reynolds,  F.  W.,  52 

Rhetoric,  study  of,  60 

Rhodes,  Alice,  123  ;  case  against, 
125-132;  verdict,  133;  re- 
leased, 134 

Rhodes,  Rt.  Hon.  Cecil,  Prime 
Minister  of  Cape  Colony,  325 

Richardson,  Harriet,  120 ;  weak 
intellect,  120;  marriage,  121. 
See  Staunton 

Richmond,  Duke  of,  at  Balmoral, 
224 

Ridgeway,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  West,  can- 
didate for  the  City  of  London,  376 

Ridley,  Lady,  190 

Ridley,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  Matthew,  190 

Rigby,  Sir  John,  appointed  Attor- 
ney-General, 306,  313 

Ripley,  H.  W.,  26 

Ritchie,  Rt.  Hon.  C.  T.,  371 

Rivers,  Horace,  6th  Baron,  120 

Robinson,  Sir  Hercules,  325 

Rodd,  Sir  Rennell,  appointed  Privy 
Councillor,  408 

Rogers,  J.  P.,  186 

Rogers,  Thorold,  M.P.  for  South- 
war  k,  1 70 

Rolt,  Sir  John,  87 

Rome,  318,  365 

Romeo  and  Juliet,  performance  of, 

J95 

Rosebery,  Archibald,  5th  Earl  of, 
member  of  the  Cabinet,  236  ;  at 
the  debate  on  the  Home  Rule 
Bill,  309  ;  Prime  Minister,  311 

Rosher,  G.  B.,  281 

Rotherhithe,  162 

Rothschild,  Hon.  Walter,  at  a  meet- 
ing against  Tariff  Reform,  382 

Round  Table  Conference,  264 

Rowton,  Montagu,  ist  Baron,  65  ; 
at  the  debate  on  the  Home  Rule 
Bill,  309 

Royal  Literary  Fund  dinner,  269 

Royalty  Theatre,  74 


Ruegg,  Mr.,  case  of  The  Times,  273 

Ruskin,  John,  40 

Russell,  Sir  Charles,  Counsel  for  the 
Defence  in  the  West  of  England 
Bank  case,  173  ;  Penge  case, 
249;  Ti mes  case,  273  ;  appointed 
Attorney- General,  306  ;  on  the 
rule  against  taking  any  private 
practice,  306  ;  income,  307  ;  the 
Jameson  Raid,  327  ;  character- 
istics, 328  ;  summing  up,  329 
on  writing  his  life,  414 

Russell,  Lord  John,  at  an  election 
meeting,  45  ;  height,  45 

Russell,  T.  W.,  on  the  proposal  to 
carry  on  Bills,  288 

Russia,  346  ;  relations  with  Great 
Britain,  341 

Ryan,  George,  202 

Rylance,  Rev.  T.,  founder  of  the 
Working  Men's  Club  and  Insti- 
tute Union,  63 

Ryswick,  Peace  of,  4 


Sadler,  Sir  Samuel,  trip  to  Canada, 

367 

Sadler's  Wells  Theatre,  69 

St.  Helier,  Francis,  Baron,  174  ; 
member  of  the  Ecclesiastical 
Discipline  Commission,  401  ; 
death,  401.  See  Jeune 

St.  Peter's  Church,  Staines,  202  ; 
consecration,  203  ;  cost,  203  ; 
figures  carved  in  stone,  398 

Salisbury,  Robert,  3rd  Marquis  of, 
leader  of  the  House  of  Lords, 
190 ;  at  Newcastle,  190  ;  char- 
acter of  his  speech,  191  ;  at 
Sheffield,  216;  negotiations  on 
the  Franchise  Bill,  226  ;  memor- 
andums from  Sir  E.  Clarke,  227- 
230;  return  to  office,  255,  315; 
offer  to  serve  under  Lord  Hart- 
ington,  263 ;  action  against, 
277-279  ;  proposal  to  carry  on 
Bills,  287  ;  on  the  retention  of 
private  practice  by  the  Law 
Officers,  315,  317 ;  promise  to 
appoint  Sir  E.  Clarke  Attorney- 
General,  317  ;  offers  him  Master- 
ship of  the  Rolls,  336 

Salmon,  Frederick,  26 

Salvation  Army,  organisation,  298 

Salvian,  Father,  116 

Samuel,  Rt.  Hon.  Herbert,  ap- 
pointed Privy  Councillor,  408 

Sandars,  Rt.  Hon.  J.  S.,  389 

Sandford,  Thomas,  5 


INDEX 


437 


Sandoz,  Mr  ,   55 

Sassoon,  Sir  Edward,  at  a  meeting 
against  Tariff  Reform,  382 

Schuster,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  Felix,  can- 
didate for  the  City  of  London,  376 

Science,  Social,  Association  for  the 
Promotion  of,  conference  at  the 
Guildhall,  63 

Scott,  Clement,  133 

Scott,   John,  104 

Scott,  Sir  Walter,  39 

Sedgwick,  Leonard,  secretary  to 
the  National  Union,  97,  98 

Selby,  William,  ist  Viscount,  279 

Selected  Speeches,  233,  299,  310,  312, 
340,  342,  344,  346,  352,  356>  358« 
361,  384,  400 

Selfe,  Mr.,  Bible-class  for  young 
men,  27 

Serf,  The,  play,  42,  70 

Sewell,  Dr.,  33 

Sexton,  Thomas,  against  the  pro- 
posal to  carry  on  Bills,  288 

Seymour,  Digby,  86 

Shaw,  Flora,  325.     See  Lugard 

Shee,  Mr.  Justice,  83 

Sheffield,  conference  of  the  Na- 
tional Union,  216 

Shelley,  John,  232,  254,  360 

Shelley,  P.  B.,  39 

Sheppard,  William,  70 

Sherborne  Castle,  348 

Sherley,  Mr.,  101,  109 

Shipton,  George,  candidate  for 
Southwark,  156 

Shipwrights,  increase  of  pay,  300 

Shorthand,  Easy,  405,  417 

Simon,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  John,  406 ; 
Attorney-General,  413  ;  at  the 
farewell  dinner  to  Sir  E.  Clarke, 

413 

Sleigh,  Sergeant,  80 

Smith,  Abel,  at  a  meeting  against 
Tariff  Reform,  382 

Smith,  A.  L.,  appointed  Counsel 
to  the  Treasury,  153  ;  Counsel 
for  the  Prosecution  in  the  West 
of  England  Bank  case,  173 

Smith,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  F.  E.f  406  ;  at 
the  farewell  dinner  to  Sir  E. 
Clarke,  414 

Smith,  Goldwin,  369 ;  conversa- 
tion with  Sir  E.  Clarke,  370 

Smith,  W.  F.  D.,  meeting  against 
Tariff  Reform,  382 

Smith,  Rt.  Hon.  W.  H.,  Leader  of 
the  House  of  Commons,  267  ;  on 
the  Channel  Tunnel  Bill,  271  ; 
illness,  287 


Smuts,  General,  404 

Snosswell,  Mr.,  28 

Soames,  Joseph,  282  ;  solicitor  to 
The  Times,  273  ;  refuses  to  under- 
take the  Parnell  divorce  case, 
284 

"  Socials  "  debating  society,  82 

Solly,  Rev.  H.,  founder  of  the  Work- 
ing Men's  Club  and  Institute 
Union,  63 

Southwark  election,  149,  155  ;  can- 
didates, 156  ;  polling  day,  162  ; 
result  of  the  election,  163,  170 

Southwark  Mercury,  The,  150 

Southwark,  Richard,  ist  Baron,  174 

Spain,  365 

Spencer,  John,  5th  Earl,  at  the 
debate  on  the  Home  Rule  Bill, 

309 

Spottiswoode,  Messrs.,  method  of 
printing  Government  work,  231 

Staines,  200,  255,  280  ;  regatta,  re- 
vival, 201 

Standard,  The,  60,  84  ;  publication 
of  the  Cabinet  draft  of  the  Re- 
distribution Bill,  231 

Stanhope,  Rt.  Hon.  Edward,  216, 
225 

Stanhope,  Hon.  Philip,  354.  See 
Wear  dale 

Stanley,  Lord,  18  ;  Secretary  of 
State  for  India,  35  ;  offers  writer- 
ships  for  competition,  35 

Staunton,  Harriet,  120 ;  birth  of 
a  child,  121,  123  ;  at  Cudham, 
121,  123  ;  relations  with  her 
husband,  123  ;  death  of  her 
child,  124  ;  brought  to  Penge, 
124 ;  illness  and  death,  124  ; 
result  of  the  post-mortem  exami- 
nation, 125, 133.  See  Richardson 

Staunton,  Louis,  121,  123  ;  case 
against,  125-132  ;  verdict,  132; 
reprieved,  134  ;  interview  with 
Sir  E.  Clarke,  134 

Staunton,  Patrick,  121,  123  ;  case 
against,  125-132  ;  verdict,  133  ; 
reprieved,  134 

Staunton,  Mrs.  Patrick,  121  ;  case 
against,  125-132  ;  birth  of  a  son 
in  gaol,  126;  verdict,  133;  re- 
leased, 134 

Steele,  Mrs.,  charge  against,  289 

Stephen,  Sir  J.  Fitzjames,  Judge, 
126;  failure  of  his  powers,  279 

Stevens,  D.  C.,  criticism  on  Sir  E. 
Clarke's  delivery  of  his  lectures, 
46 

Stevens,  W.  R.,  53    78 


438 


INDEX 


Stevenson,  Dr.,  evidence  in  the 
Bartlett  case,  250 

Stibbs,  William,  183 

Stirling,  Lord  Justice,  330 

Straight,  Douglas,  79,  122,  126 

Strathcona,  Lord,  368 

Stringer,  Edgar  P.,  26 

Stuart- Wortley,  Rt.  Hon.  C.,  amend- 
ment on  Free  Trade,  382  ;  divi- 
sion on,  385  ;  appointed  Under- 
secretary for  the  Home  Depart- 
ment, 242 

Sumner,  Lord,  at  the  farewell  dinner 
to  Sir  E.  Clarke,  414 

Surrey  Sessions,  character,  78 

Surrey  Theatre,  70 

Suter,  Eleanor,  120 

Sutton,  Henry,  327 

Swansea,  meeting  at,  101 

Sweet  Lavender,  performance  of,  77 

Swifthand :  A  New  Simple  and 
Rapid  Method  of  Writing,  405 

Switzerland,  189 

Tabor,  Dr.,  School  at  Cheam,  201 

Talbot,  Rt  Hon.  J.  G.,  on  the  pro- 
posal to  carry  on  Bills,  288  ;  at 
a  meeting  against  Tariff  Reform, 
382 

Talfourd,  Sir  T.,  39 

Tancred,  Christopher,  bequest  to 
Lincoln's  Inn,  47,  77 

Tariff  Reform,  193,  366,  381  ;  meet- 
ing against,  382 

Taylor,  Colonel,  62  ;  Vice- Presi- 
dent of  the  National  Union,  98 

Temple,  Dr.,  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury, consecrates  St.  Peter's 
Church,  203  ;  on  ecclesiastical 
discipline,  398 

Tennyson,  Alfred,  ist  Baron,  40 

Terriss,  William,  195 

Terry,  Edward,  77 

Terry,  Ellen,  69,  195,  253 

Testament,  New,  Authorised  Ver- 
sion of  the,  emendation,  406,  417 

Thackeray,  W.  M.,  40 

Thomas,  Rev.  David,  founder  of 
the  Working  Men's  Club  and 
Institute  Union,  63 

Thomas,  Moy,  72 

Thorncote,  201 

Thornton,  Percy,  M.P.,  at  a  meet- 
ing against  Tariff  Reform,  382 

Thring,  Henry,  ist  Lord,  100 

Tidy,  Dr.  Meymott,  evidence  in 
the  Bartlett  case,  250 

Times,  The,  articles  on  "  Parnellism 
and  Crime,"  265,  274  ;  charge 


against,  267-269  ;  Special  Com- 
mission appointed,  274  ;  action 
for  libel  against,  272-274,  282  ; 
letter  from  Sir  E.  Clarke,  348 

Tithes  Bill,  280,  288,  294  ;  with- 
drawn, 282 

Todd,  Wilson,  196 

Tonbridge,  163 

Toole,  J.  L.,  54 

Toronto,  112,  368,  369;  St.  James's 
Cathedral,  369 

Tranby  Croft,  295 

Transvaal,  war  expenditure,  324 

Treloar,  Thomas,  26 

Treloar,  Sir  William.  Bart.,  374  ; 
defence  of  Sir  E.  Clarke,  387 

Tremouille,  Adelaide  Blanche  de 
la,  246.  See  Bartlett 

Trench,  Archbishop,  lines  from, 
410,  418 

Trevelyan.  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  George, 
at  the  Round  Table  Conference, 
264 

Trip  to  South  Africa,  404 

Troll  ope,  Anthony,  40 

Truscott,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  Francis,  elec- 
tion petition  case,  175 

Turf  Fraud  case,  the  Great,  136- 
148 

United  States,  controversy  with 
Great  Britain,  3 1 9-32  3  "* 

Vancouver,  371 
Vectis,  the,  374 
Venezuela,  dispute  with  Great 

Britain,  319-323 
Verrall,  Colonel,  372 
Victoria,  371 
Victoria,  Queen,  wisdom  and  tact, 

226  ;    at  Balmoral,  240 
Victoria  Theatre,  72 
Vincent,  Sir  Edgar,  M.P.  for  Exeter, 

361 

Wace,  Rev.  Henry,  51 

Waghorn,  Mr.,  50 

Wales,  no;  disestablishment  of  the 
Church,  299,  313 

Wales,  H.R.H.  Albert  Edward, 
Prince  of,  relations  with  the  Mar- 
quis of  Blandford,  213  ;  at 
Tranby  Croft,  295  ;  box  of  coun- 
ters, 296  ;  present  at  the  debate 
on  the  Home  Rule  Bill,  309 

Walker,  Mr.,  370 

Wallingford,  election  petition  case, 


INDEX 


439 


Walrond,  Lionel,  at  a  meeting 
against  Tariff  Reform,  382 

War  for  Commerce,  344 

Ward,  Horatia,  no;  at  Pinner, 
no 

Ward,  Nelson,  no 

Warington,  George,  28 

Warington,  Robert,  28 

Waterloo,  victory  of,  5 

Waterlow,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  Sydney,  119 

Watkin,  Sir  Edward,  271 

Watson,  James,  editor  of  The 
Kentish  Mercury,  150 

Watson,  Sir  Thomas,  59 

Watts,  John  George,  52 

Weardale,  Philip,  ist  Baron,  354 

Webster,  Sir  Richard,  135  ;  ap- 
pointed Attorney-General,  24?, 
317  ;  relations  with  Sir  E.  Clarke, 
259,  418  ;  method  of  work,  259, 
262  ;  on  The  Times  case,  274  ; 
Jameson  Raid  trial,  327  ;  de- 
clines Mastership  of  the  Rolls, 
336  ;  amendment  on  the  Church 
Discipline  Bill,  399.  See  Alver- 
stone 

Welby,  Reginald,  Baron,  member 
of  the  Commission  on  Irish 
Finance,  333 

Wellington,  Duke  of,  funeral,  19 

Wernher,  Beit  &  Co.,  Messrs., 
charges  against,  329-331  ;  gift 
to  the  City  of  London  College, 

33i 

West  of  England  Bank  case,  172  ; 
Counsel  for  the  Prosecution,  173  ; 
for  the  Defence,  173 

Western  Mail,  The,  101 

Westminster  Hall,  dynamite  ex- 
plosion, 236 

Whitbread,  Mr.,  against  the  pro- 
posal to  carry  on  Bills,  288 

Whitfield,  Richard,  76 

Whitley,  Mr.,  216 

Whittington,  Rev.  Richard,  29 ; 
establishes  evening  classes  for 
young  men,  29 

Wigan,  Alfred,  73 

Wigan,  Horace,  73 

Wilberforce,  William,  5 


William  II,  Emperor  of  Germany, 
telegram  to  President  Kruger,  326 

William  III,  King,  4 

Williams,  Montagu,  126 

Williamson,  Superintendent,  evi- 
dence at  the  Great  Turf  Fraud 
trial,  i4">,  146 

Willis,  William,  M.P.  for  Colchester, 

i?4 
Wills,    Rt.    Hon.    Sir    Alfred,    the 

Bartlett  case,  249  ;   summing-up, 

252 

Wilton.  Marie,  70 
Wimble,  Edward,  102? 
Wimborne,  Ivor,  Baron,  '359 
Winchelsea,  32 
Windsor  Castle,  408 
Windsor,  Charles,  case  of,  83,  85 
Winn,  Rowland,  226 
Wiseman,   Cardinal,  Appeal  to  the 

People  of  England,  28 
Wolff,  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  Henry  Drum- 

mond,  member  of  the  National 

Union,  217 

Woodfall,  Miss,  marriage,  109 
Woodstock,  107 
Wordsworth,  William,  39 
Working  Men's  Club  and  Institute 

Union,  63 
Working  Men's  College,  lectures  at, 

59 

Workmen's  Compensation  Bill,  339 
Worms,  Henry  de,  205 
Worthing,  188 
Wren,     Walter,     election    petition 

case,  178 
Wright,  R.  S.,  183,  249 

Yeo,  Dr.,  201 

York,    H.R.H.    George,    Duke    of, 

present    at   the   debate   on   the 

Home  Rule  Bill,  309 ;  Treasurer 

of  Lincoln's  Inn,  396 
York     Conservative      Association 

meeting,  99 

Young,  Mrs.  Charles,  69 
Young,   Sir  George,  candidate  for 

Plymouth,  184 

Zoological  Gardens,  13 


Printed  by  Hatell.  Watson  &>  Viney,  Ld.,  London  and  Aylesbury, 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW 


AN  INITIAL  FINE  OF  25  CENTS 

WILL  BE  ASSESSED  FOR  FAILURE  TO  RETURN 
THIS  BOOK  ON  THE  DATE  DUE.  THE  PENALTY 
WILL  INCREASE  TO  SO  CENTS  ON  THE  FOURTH 
D^t^NCI  flPngVP0  ON  THE  SEVENTH  DAY 
OVER  DUE.'  *  #*V  >  J 


F£6  lu  1940 

-    ^f)3t1AftWM 

REC.  CIR.  SEP     5  '80 

LD  21-100m-7,'39(402s) 

415262 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


